6 ms·

I didn't say it would be fast, only that it seemed like the right place for the specific goals of multipath TCP in order to minimize code duplication and overco

I didn't say it would be fast, only that it seemed like the right place for the specific goals of multipath TCP in order to minimize code duplication and overcome the various "smart" devices (a marketing word, not an accurate description) that pierce layer boundaries (like smart switches that look at IP headers, and routers that look at TCP/UDP flows) and have effectively rendered it impossible to develop new protocol semantics in lower layers (because they won't make it across the Internet; IPv6 could be depolyed by now if lots of ISPs didn't have "smart" devices blocking everything but IP+TCP+some special types of UDP). I blame such devices for making it unnecessarily complicated to develop multipath semantics over the current Internet. The rest of your comment is pretty insulting. :)

Nrsolis 14y ago
Uh, you don't know what you're talking about. ISPs dont block UDP. And IPv6 was held up by a lot more than hardware. Sorry. Go read up on how IP routers actually function and then report back with what you've learned. Source: I've been doing this (networking) since before there was an Internet. I currently don't touch routers that do anything less than 10Gbps/port and really prefer to work with 100Gbps/port. That's a cool couple o'million bucks per chasis, yo.