RE: WG next steps

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

On Thu, 14 Nov 2002, Christian Huitema wrote:

> 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.

[...]

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

Do we think it is worthwhile to continue down the network/routing based
solutions? The lack of feedback on my draft suggests people aren't very
interested in working on this. If we want to do this at the routing
level, we have start exploring less obvious stuff. For instance, using
the flow label or diffserv code points to swim across the default zone
towards a network that knows more specific routing information.

But there seems enough interest in multi-address/host based solutions.