Re: Transport level multihoming

[Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>]

> In a transport level multihoming scenario, should two addresses that differ
> in the lower 64 bits (node address part) be considered independent nodes and
> handled in the traditional manner with regard to multiple addresses?
> 
> Why I ask is that the upper 64 bits of all possible full addresses for a
> particular node that is multihomed have particular properties that would be
> useful to exploit in transport level multihoming.  If the lower 64 bits is
> not identical between multiple addresses, it could lead to inefficiencies in
> a compressed representation of the list of IPv6 addresses.  It may also be
> important to some layers of any multihoming protocol to consider that
> addresses which differ in the lower 64 bits would not being equivalent for
> the purposes of multihoming.

are you asking if the forwarding look-up is longest match on 64 or 128 bits?
i think the latter is mandatory.  we do allow allocation of /128s.

randy