[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Simplifying IKE
Another advantage for adopting a 2-message exchange is large-delay
satellite links. In particular, consumer satellite broadband
companies, such as Starband and other companies on the horizon, are
using GEO satellites which have a substantial delay of > ~500ms RTT,
just to get across the satellite link. Note, thatdoesn't necessarily
include RTT time from the ground-station through the terrestrial
Internet to the ultimate destination.
Also, Dan, have you defined and/or suggested a value of the
RETRANSMIT_TIMER_LIMIT? I would suggest that it has to either: a) be
hard-coded relatively high to accomodate large-delay
satellite/cellular links; or, b) be set at some reasonable default,
but optionally configurable by the end-user so they may set it higher
or lower depending on their particular application.
Does this sound reasonable?
-shane
Jan Vilhuber wrote:
> > making a 2 message exchange. I favor an even number of messages. Whether
> > that's 2 or 4 I don't MUCH care (2 would be preferable if we can figure out
> > how).
>
> I'd just like to repeat my preference for the minimal number of messages
> even in this context. When these things are used over cellular links with
> relatively long delays, additional messages really affect the delays before
> you can start work.
>
> Jari