RE: The state of IPv6 multihoming development

[Iljitsch van Beijnum <iljitsch@muada.com>]

On Thu, 24 Oct 2002, Michael H. Lambert wrote:

> > Looking
> > at a large multihomed organization as simply a collection of individual
> > hosts that are all multihomed is unmanagable. So remove the multihoming
> > processing to the edges where you can control it. I think that could
> > work well.

> >From S's perspective, I can see that this scenario would make it easy to
> use the right path (from N1, N2, ...) to reach D.  However, wouldn't it
> require the edge to maintain state for each flow which crosses it?

It shouldn't if these boxes just replace prefixes. In current NAT setups
much more is changed: the entire address, not just a prefix, for
starters, and also a port number and the TCP/UDP checksum. In the setup
I'm talking about just the prefix (presumably, the 48 most significant
bits) change and everything else remains the same, so no need to keep
state.