RE: Simple dual homing experiment

["Tony Li" <Tony.Li@procket.com>]

|    David and I wrote up a "simple dual homing" proposal, 
|    based on previous drafts and private conversations. This 
|    may be one of several ways of going forward in multi6.


Christian,

First, I don't believe that 3.5 is a real requirement.  It is
not a problem that is solved today in any technology short of
full blown traffic engineering.  While I agree that this would
be valuable, I don't see how this really cuts it as a requirement.

Of your other requirements, it would seem that they would all
be addressed as long as:

	1) routers which don't have a working exit don't advertise
         default
	2) hosts rotate their source (and destination) addresses
	   among the possible set

Further, I would argue that your requirement for 3.4 isn't strong
enough.  That the connection should NOT break.

Comments?

Tony