Brian E Carpenter wrote: > I share Tony's frustration with long hiatus in multi6, but it > seems to be unstuck at the moment. I also agree that it's > hard to separate the topics, but I see no practical advantage > in repatriating the multihoming issue into this WG, which > already has a diverse agenda.
Yes it is unstuck, but I strongly suggest it be brought back into this WG because (1) it is way outside the bounds of figuring out how to operate a multihomed network, and into rearchitecting the system in ways that will seriously undermine all assumptions about reachability and security, (2) is completely off the radar of anyone that did not stick it out through the dead time, & (3) is the root of the discussion here about the utility of simultaneous use of addresses with different reachability characteristics. Tony -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List IPng Home Page: http://playground.sun.com/ipng FTP archive: ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng Direct all administrative requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------
