RE: issue 11 -- window size
"Stephane Beaulieu" <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.mobike |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Is there really a point of reserving. I mean, what's the peer going to do if you exceed the window? (other than complain you're violating the RFC :). The peer will silently drop it until it's finished with another one, right. So what ! I can just keep transmitting my mobike message(s) until the peer has a chance to process it and respond, right? Stephane. > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Paul Hoffman > Sent: Thursday, March 31, 2005 10:44 AM > To: Geoffrey Huang; 'Bill Sommerfeld'; 'Jari Arkko' > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: RE: [Mobike] issue 11 -- window size > > At 9:51 PM -0800 3/30/05, Geoffrey Huang wrote: > >So it needs to > >split this between "regular" IKE messages and MOBIKE messages? > > Not "split", but "allow enough extra for MOBIKE". > > >I prefer your earlier suggestion of reserving one or two message IDs > >from the window for mobility purposes. Consider a roaming > client that > >gets a notify from a security gateway (SGW) saying the SGW's window > >size is 5. The client should know that it's capable of mobility and > >consequently reserve a message ID for MOBIKE messages. Just > because a > >peer sends a notification about a window size doesn't mean that an > >implementation needs to fill up the window. > > That sounds good. The question is: how many should we suggest > to reserve? > > --Paul Hoffman, Director > --VPN Consortium > _______________________________________________ > Mobike mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.machshav.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mobike >