Re: FW: Marcelo's review of mobike protocol

marcelo bagnulo braun wrote:

> right, but supporting unidirectional paths in the protocol makes the 
> protocol to perform better in such scenarios

That's right. But such support is hard (as we have found
out in shim6... which only supports this partially). Perhaps
more importantly, MOBIKE had a discussion about the unidirectional
paths some months ago and made a decision in the WG that
we're not doing it. Reasons behind this included toughness
of supporting it with NAT traversal, among others. I'd rather
not re-open that discussion unless we find a serious problem.
We are already aware that we can't support some scenarios due to
this - that's fine.

--Jari