On Thu, Nov 19, 2015, at 23:04, Eric Dumazet wrote: > On Thu, 2015-11-19 at 22:53 +0100, Hannes Frederic Sowa wrote: > > > > > You don't steer QUIC source addresses at all? I think most networking > > failures are of transient nature thus the kernel routing subsystem is > > not aware of link quality and packets get lost anyway e.g. in the air? > > Thus binding on multiple interfaces and keepalives seem still > > appropriate, no? > > Imagine you are in your home near a wifi AP, then you close a door and > switch to 3G, or another AP. > > No down time. packet will eventually reach its destination. > > Application does not have to care. > > Why QUIC should absolutely use '4-tuple UDP connections' when this is > likely to fail in this scenario ?
My point is the "eventually" and the very much increased latency until the kernel learns about new better source addresses it has available. I would monitor link quality over time and decide source address based on this on the sending side. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
