> Excerpts from Christian Huitema on Sun, Apr 05, 2009 10:10:37PM -0700: > > My point is that if we want site multi-homing, we cannot do without > > engineering this routing symmetry. If we leave it to chance, then > > future network administrators will observe maddening failure modes, > > and we will have done them a great disservice. Just sticking NAT > > devices at various network edges is, for me, equivalent to leaving > > it to chance. > > What failure modes? IP routing will be as deterministic (ahem) as it > is now. E2E session continuity is at risk, but session continuity in > the face of massive routing changes is not, as far as I know, a goal > in NAT66. The only truly difficult scenario is the one Fred Baker > described where traffic could yoyo back and forth. I could see using > routing headers.
The failure mode happens in the 4-ways criss-cross scenario, which I described in a previous message: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/nat66/current/msg00200.html>. -- Christian Huitema _______________________________________________ nat66 mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nat66
