Re: WG next steps

[Pekka Savola <pekkas@netcore.fi>]

On Sat, 16 Nov 2002, Masataka Ohta wrote:
> > > There are really two classes of solutions. I would categorize them as
> > > "host multi-homing and network multi-homing".
> > >
> > > [...]
> > >
> > > I suggest we charter two follow-on efforts, one to explore a network
> > > based solution and one to explore a host based solution.
> > 
> > I support this.  As a general rule, I feel that larger organizations are
> > going to want network-based solutions for multihoming; smaller
> > organizations are most likely to accept either.
> 
> I'm afraid you miss the point of IPv6 that NLA ISPs need multihomed
> to TLA ISPs.
> 
> Large organizations such as TLA or NLA ISPs won't accept anything
> requiring cooperation with other competitive ISPs.

Depending on the level of cooperation.

If the ISP's customer sets a requirement for some kind of co-operation
(like accepting a more specific route from the competetitive ISP) or else
chooses another ISP, the ISP would have every reason to co-operate (within 
reasonable limits, as said) with its competitors.

-- 
Pekka Savola                 "Tell me of difficulties surmounted,
Netcore Oy                   not those you stumble over and fall"
Systems. Networks. Security.  -- Robert Jordan: A Crown of Swords