On 9/10/14 11:51 AM, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote: > On Wed, 10 Sep 2014, Acee Lindem (acee) wrote: > >> My point was the even if this draft is accepted by 6MAN, standardized, >> and even implemented some day, it doesn’t satisfy the HOMENET >> multi-homed routing requirement. > > I don't get it. Could you please be more elaborate? >
The 2nd paragraph of Section 4 says: The solution should start with the correct configuration of the host. The host should be configured with the next hop addresses and the prefixes supported in these next hops. This way the host having received many prefixes will have the correct knowledge in selecting the right source address and next hop when sending packets to remote destinations. That sounds like new functionality on the host. Not sure if that is what caught Acee's attention, though. Regards, Brian > > > _______________________________________________ > homenet mailing list > homenet@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet >
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ homenet mailing list homenet@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
