Re: charter

[Masataka Ohta <mohta@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>]

Randy;

> this wannabe-wg needs to get its charter on the iesg agenda by the end of
> today.  the appended was proposed by thomas.  it needs a few millstones.
> could the wwg please converge on this today?  thanks.

Today? In which time zone?

Anyway...

> This WG will consider the problem of how to multihome sites in
> IPv6. While the multihoming approaches used in IPv4 can also be used
> in IPv6, alternate approaches are needed.  IPv6 differs from IPv4 in
> ways that may allow for different approaches to multihoming that are
> not immediately applicable to IPv4. For example, IPv6 has larger
> addresses and hosts support multiple addresses per interface.

I think additional example must be added:

	IPv6 differs from IPv4 that its global routing table is small.

> The WG will take on the following initial tasks:
> 
> Produce a document defining what site multihoming is, the requirements
> for a multihoming solution (from both the end site and ISP
> perspective).  This document will also include a taxonomy of different
> ways that multihoming might be achieved.

That task is acceptable only if it does not affect the last task.

> The WG will also consider specific proposals to multihoming in IPv6
> (both existing and new) and select a small number of them to work on
> as formal WG items. Development of specific solutions will require
> approval of the IESG (e.g., a recharter).

We can technically discuss difference between multiple proposals.
However, discussion on taxonomies with different proposals in
minds is really unproductive.

							Masataka Ohta