Re: issue 19 -- same addresses for both directions?

Hi Jari,

Comments inline.

Jari Arkko wrote:
> 
> I wrote earlier tha the decision on issue 20 (who decides)
> also has a big impact on issue 19. If we had decided in 20
> that the decisions  are independent, then it might in fact
> have been very hard to  ensure that the two directions
> use the same addresses. As a result, allowing different
> addresses would make  more sense in this scenario.
> 
> But we ended up with "initiator decides". Therefore the
> deciding entity knows enough about the situation to be
> able to use the same address pairs in both directions.

This makes sense to me - it's the logical progression from what was
decided for Issue 20.

> Of course, this does not necessarily have to be done.
> We could develop a protocol that provides independent
> addresses, yet would be controlled by the initiator.
> (Probably with some cost in terms of complexity.
> And I'm not quite sure how to deal with NATs and
> keepalives in that kind of a scenario.)

I can't imagine why this would be useful.  In which scenarios wouldn't
we want the initiator to decide which address pairs to use in both
directions?

-g

> How do you folks feel about this? Please post your
> comments by Friday, June 3rd.
> 
> --Jari
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Mobike mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.machshav.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mobike