I am agree with Thomas's opinion.
It seems like some kinds of "ISP selection" rather than multihoming IMO
and places additional complexity in the hosts.

>-----Original Message-----
>From: Thomas Narten [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
>Sent: Wednesday, June 07, 2006 9:50 PM
>To: ipv6@ietf.org
>Subject: Re: questions about draft-wen-ipv6-rsra-opt-multihoming-00
>
>
>FWIW, based on my skimming of the document, I think this is a 
>bad approach. Reasons:
>
>1) the scenario is rather limited, a single link directly connected to
>   multiple ISPs (through different routers). IMO, this is too
>   limiting a scenario to develop a specifiic solution that doesn't
>   address a other scenarios.
>
>2) It places additional complexity in the hosts, and it is not clear
>   to me that the benefits are sufficient. Indeed, it's not
>   immediately clear what the "multihoming" aspect is. In my mind,
>   "multihoming" means having multiple ISP connections, and actually
>   using them simultaneously. The approach in the document seems to
>   consist of "pick just one", which is not multihoming IMO. Or if it
>   is "use multiple ones simultaneously", then the host needs to be
>   sure to route packets to the right router based on the source
>   adddresses used. That is signifificant (new) complexity and I am
>   not at all sure we should be doing that at this point in time.
>
>So, at this time, color me very skeptical to this idea.
>
>Indeed, I'd prefer backing up a bit and having discussions 
>about the problem statement and what the actual problem is 
>that needs solving.
>
>Thomas   
>
>--------------------------------------------------------------------
>IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
>ipv6@ietf.org
>Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
>--------------------------------------------------------------------
>



--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
ipv6@ietf.org
Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply via email to