[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: scope of solution..



Bora Akyol wrote:
>
> Why is it a good idea to involve the hosts in a site as part of the
> multi-homing solution?
>

If you've got two blocks of addresses, from two separate upstreams, and
one link croaks, you'd either need the hosts (end stations) to be able
to change which source address they're using, or you have to do
multi-homing the way we presently do on IPv4 (and on IPv6 presently),
that being to have the multi-homing done by announcing address space
into the core.

> If this WG decides to involve the hosts as part of the multi-homing for
> IPv6, to what extent will they be involved.
>
> My own inclination is to support multi-homing at the router level and do
> not require anything other than a basic default route for most hosts.

The issue is that argument ties to either the present style of
multihoming, or a requirement to use NAT in the router to make things
continue to work in the event of an outage. Since the NAT case is
guaranteed to blow up many applications, that's not real practical. The
general claim is that our present method of multihoming isn't scaling.
This leads to the question of doing something at the host level. It's
essentially moving what's presently done in some NAT-box-multihoming
products into the host.

>
> Bora
>
> On Wed, 11 Apr 2001, Bill Sommerfeld wrote:
>
> > one of Margaret Wasserman's notes talked about the solution coming
> > from either "the routing system" or "the hosts".
> >
> > Since we're talking about *site* multihoming, there are (at least)
> > three scopes here:
> >
> >  - the routing systems of the ISP's outside the site
> >
> >  - the routing system within the site
> >
> >  - the hosts within the site.
> >
> > A scalable multihoming solution could involve some form of
> > coordination between the site's routers and the site's hosts..
> >
> >

------------------------------------------------------------------
Daniel Senie                                        dts@senie.com
Amaranth Networks Inc.                    http://www.amaranth.com