Re: Transport level multihoming

[Bill Sommerfeld <sommerfeld@orchard.arlington.ma.us>]

> > 	#1 - how multihoming is done today in the Internet
> > 	#2 - requirements for multihoming in an IPv6 Internet
> >            (which probably should say "AT LEAST #1 and some more things")
> 
> just to make trouble, and not because i have a position on the question, is
> the parenthetical above *really* a desirable/necessary condition?  i.e.  if,
> by magic, we come up with a really sexy v6 solution, must it also support
> current v4-style multihoming.

I really hope Sean meant:

problem #1: multihoming v4 in today's internet
problem #2: multihoming v6 in a future IPv6 Internet
 - requirements for #2 are a subset of the requirements to #1
 - possible solutions to #2 are a superset of the solutions to #1

					- Bill