Hi Rao -
On Wed, 28 Mar 2018, Rao Shoaib wrote:
I have recently noticed that the group is working on socket level
changes to MPTCP.
Can a summary of the issues and how the changes will solve them be
posted to the list? That would help any new participants as well. If
they have already been discussed please point me to the thread.
I proposed moving away from the metasocket architecture last summer:
When I reviewed the multipath-tcp.org
implementation of MPTCP, my
assessment was (and is) that using metasockets resulted in more intrusive
code changes for TCP. The more partitioned approach of KCM and RDS (using
internal kernel sockets) shows an example of in-kernel features that the
maintainers have merged. The approach seemed feasible and I proposed it as
a direction to go.
It will also help if it can be made clear how these changes will
expedite implementation of a basic MPTCP implementation. I believe that
is the current goal, but my understanding may be incorrect.
I think it will expedite upstreaming in the sense that metasockets would
never get merged upstream, and that a more partitioned approach with
dedicated subflow sockets has a reasonable shot. That's my opinion based
on what I've seen from the maintainers (in terms of mailing list
discussions, conversations, and what they have merged in the past).
Now, Christoph has raised the topic for more detailed discussion with
regard to the specifics of the multipath-tcp.org
implementation. I don't
think anything is a foregone conclusion in terms of this aspect of the
upstreaming project, you can propose a different approach to discuss.