RE: WG next steps

["Hesham Soliman (EAB)" <hesham.soliman@era.ericsson.se>]

  > There are really two classes of solutions. I would 
  > categorize them as
  > "host multi-homing and network multi-homing".
  > 
  > The network multi-homing solution assumes that a network 
  > gets several
  > providers, and that the routing fabric somehow manages to 
  > make all these
  > providers behave as one. In the current architecture, the 
  > network gets a
  > single prefix, and the impact on the DFZ could be immense. 
  > 
  > The host multi-homing solution assumes that the host has 
  > several network
  > providers, and that these providers are not in any way aware of each
  > other. For example, a host may have a GPRS connection to 
  > ATT wireless
  > and a DSL connection to Earthlink. In the current 
  > architecture, the host
  > gets different addresses from the different providers. 
  > There is no DFZ
  > explosion, since each of these addresses gets aggregated in the
  > provider's prefix. The main impact is on the host software. Today we
  > have at least a partial solution, with the address 
  > selection rules; we
  > could combine that solution with a variation of Mobile IPv6 
  > for better
  > resiliency.

=> This is exactly my understanding too.

  > 
  > I suggest we charter two follow-on efforts, one to explore a network
  > based solution and one to explore a host based solution.

=> Agreed

Hesham