RE: multi-homing vs multi-connecting

["Christian Huitema" <huitema@windows.microsoft.com>]

>     > Other than adding the non-trivial problem of source address
> selection to
>     > the mix, I don't see that IPv6 changes things.
> 
> Classical IPv6 dosn't. That's a big part of its problems.

Depends what you call classical IPv6. If you throw in the support for
"binding update", then IPv6 does a reasonable job at "host
multi-homing", and I believe that we only need a limited amount of
additional work to support "small site multi-homing"; essentially, you
have to get around egress filtering.

On the other hand, I certainly agree with your assessment of the more
complexes forms of multi-homing, and the data explosion that occurs if
we want to have site connected to N providers also choose the path
through M upstream providers. But we must be aware that the problem here
is not just graph theory; there are also economic/business issues that
affect the willingness of downstream providers to let customers choose
an upstream path.

-- Christian Huitema