RE: Transport level multihoming

[Peter Tattam <peter@jazz-1.trumpet.com.au>]

Read it already.  My initial understanding of it was that it supported the
preexisting policy of small DFZ.   The only way this can be done is to enforce
strong aggregation policy.  If open the gate even slightly the traditional BGP
thinking will just push things back to what they were with IPv4.

I was on the side of weak aggregation policy until I "saw the light". Then when
I applied my lateral thinking skills, I stumbled onto a possible solution that
didn't involve complicated routing exchange protocols.  Any solution that
shifts the decision making towards the edges of the network is going to scale a
whole lot better than one at the core.

Peter

On Sat, 4 Aug 2001, Randy Bush wrote:

> you may find <http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/multi6-charter.html>
> a bit helpful
> 
> randy
> 

--
Peter R. Tattam                            peter@trumpet.com
Managing Director,    Trumpet Software International Pty Ltd
Hobart, Australia,  Ph. +61-3-6245-0220,  Fax +61-3-62450210