From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Message-ID: <020101c38775$5a0c8840$b9844051@insultant.net>
From: "boyd, rounin" <boyd@insultant.net>
To: <9fans@cse.psu.edu>
References: <968b6a09adf6724f3bdd4525efee97a1@vitanuova.com> <009701c38738$06a39cd0$c901a8c0@cc77109e> <20030930135113.I8268@cackle.proxima.alt.za>
Subject: Re: [9fans] Multi-stack mail problem.
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 19:07:31 +0200
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 58c9d010-eacc-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025

> I detect a degree of consensus: dial is where the routing needs to
> be determined.  Now we need to figure out how to tech dial all
> sorts of independent tricks to establish the relationships between
> destinations and interfaces (network stacks).

hard

> I don't think we need to worry unduly about the reverse: once a
> packet has arrived over an interface, it can be assumed that that
> interface is the right one for the connection.  If it can't be,
> one can make special arrangements.

the interface my die.  the net/route may go down.  there my be mutiple
interfaces on the same net.  no,  this is the 'ultrix school of coding
to fix improbable kernel conditions', which can't be tested.

it goes:

    error 1

        try to fix error 1

        error 2

           try to fix error 2

           error 3

                 ...