Re: Mutli6 meeting in Vienna

[Thierry Ernst <ernst@sfc.wide.ad.jp>]

Hi,

> > Is there any restriction on the length of the prefix for a network to be
> > considered site-multihomed ?
> 
> "Site multihoming" to one provider (called site multiconnecting in the v4 
> draft) is basically a no-brainer, AFAIK.  

I'm happy to learn it's a no-brainer, that was not my perception, but I
need a little more thoughts on this. Is there any recommended document
we should read to understand the problem space (besides the multi6 i-d)
?

> Is there something here which leads you to believe we need to work on this?

No, I'm just trying to understand the problem space in the case I
connect an in-vehicle network to different ISPs, where the prefix should
come from, its length, etc, and also scalability concerns (there are 700
Millions vehicles in the world). So, I have a strong interest in the
word conducted in Multi6. We have to make sure your forthcoming
solutions will work for NEMO.

> We could push multi-connecting as a solution/workaround for some use cases 
> though.  IMO, that makes perfect sense to me, but at the same time, it 
> cannot meet *all* the sites' needs, so we need something else too.

Thanks,
Thierry