comments on mipv6 application to multihoming [Re: Move forward]

[Pekka Savola <pekkas@netcore.fi>]

On Wed, 12 Mar 2003, Marcelo Bagnulo wrote:
> We have tried to evaluate a concrete proposal for multi-homing using 
> MIPv6 tools. The result can be found:
> 
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-bagnulo-multi6-mnm-00.txt
> 
> We would really appreciate your comments,

Some jetlagged comments.

substantial:
------------

==> The problem is that this mechanism only "works" (for some definition of
works) for sessions that are broken over 140 seconds (ie. connection is not
aborted before that), with the upper bound of 420 seconds.  On top of that,
quite a bit of signalling is performed just in case that a link might go
down.

Needless to say, this doesn't seem to be all that useful, the tradeoffs
would seem to be quite overwhelming: especially the 140 seconds; I'd say
the outage of 10-20 seconds is the most that's acceptable for most
connections to stay properly alive.

==> however, I appreciate thinking the whole thing through.. however, as 
it is, the doc is quite heavy to read as it's full of gritty details 
(which are nice when you want to get down to it, and verify it), but more 
focus should be given to the big picture..

==> there is a need for a shorter overview before section 4.3

==> sect 4.3 must be split into smaller pieces

   In the application scenario, according to [3],

   Site Exit Anycast Addresses for ISPA is
   PA:Site:FFFF:FFFF:FFFF:FFFF:FFFF (Hereafter SEAAA)

   Site Exit Anycast Addresses for ISPB is
   PB:Site:FFFF:FFFF:FFFF:FFFF:FFFF (Hereafter SEAAB)

   Then, MHH will try first to send a first packet with:

==> these values seem to be irrelevant, remove.  Btw, how does a node know the
prefix length of his site?  Not an easy problem, unless it's guessing..

editorials:
-----------

     Application of the MIPv6 protocol to the multi-homing problem

==> uppercase the first chars of the most words
==> same goes for the section titles

   This note attempts to describe how to apply the MIPv6 protocol to

==> s/MIPv6/Mobile IPv6 (MIPv6)/

1. Introduction

==> split the section; too long paragraphs are difficult to read
==> actually, a lot of paragraphs should be split up

   1- A path failure detection mechanism, that enables end-hosts to

==> s/,//

4.2.3 Required capability #1

==> reqs should be listed in order or numbered differently

   alternative ISP is to be used for coursing packets. Source address

==> I'm not sure what you mean by "coursing" but I suggest using another :-)
(many other places..)

   the second message. IF this is the case, a BU message is sent,

==> s/IF/If/

   Finally, this solution does not requires that multi-homed sites to

==> s/requires that/require/

References

   [1]  Johnson, D., Perkins, C. and J. Arkko, "Mobility Support in
        IPv6", Internet Draft, Work in progress, May 2002.

==> split the refs
==> s/J. Arkko/Arkko, J./ (same everywhere)

-- 
Pekka Savola                 "You each name yourselves king, yet the
Netcore Oy                    kingdom bleeds."
Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings