Re: Multihoming by IP Layer Address Rewriting (MILAR)

[Mattias Pettersson <mattias.pettersson@era.ericsson.se>]

marcelo bagnulo wrote:
> 
> > So: what do we change in IP? There are several drafts and not-so-drafty
> > proposals. They all have stronger and weaker points, and most of them seem
> > to gravitate towards some kind of address rewriting scheme.
> 
> Perhaps we can try to collect strong points from different proposals :-)
> 
> IMO Preserving Active TCP sessions on Multi-homed IPv6 Networks (PATS from
> now on) and LIN6 are both very interesting proposals.
> 
> However, PATS  is not transparent to TCP layer and above what introduces the
> transport address concept and brings some problems (IPsec, TCP pseudo header
> calculation and others as mentioned in the draft). This issue is solved in
> LIN6 making address translation at IP level and making it transparent for
> TCP, so that for TCP (and IPSec) only one address is used.
> 
> In the other hand, LIN6 uses a complex mechanism (designed for mobile
> environement) for mapping different addresses (for defining the address
> set), while PATS provide a simpler solution (IP prefixes option and perhaps
> DNS info) to define the address set.
> 
> Wouldn?t be posible to merge them into one and obtain the best of the two
> worlds?
> 
> Regards, marcelo

I would like you to consider Homeless Mobile IPv6
<draft-nikander-mobileip-homelessv6-01.txt> as well. It tries to solve
mobility and multihoming in one attempt somewhere around layer 3.5.

/Mattias