RE: LIN6 i-d for multihoming and mobility support

["Ayyasamy, Senthilkumar \(UMKC-Student\)" <saq66@umkc.edu>]

> The mapping agent becomes a critical part since it is required to establish
> the communication, so in a multi-homed environment, where do you place it?
> do you place it in the multihomed site or in the isps? what happens if the
> path to the MA is down? i guess that since one of the goals of multihoming
> is the provision of a more resilient network, the inclusion of an additional
> critical device must be very well justified and the potential failures of
> such device must be studied in depth
 
why can't we just make a case for a distributed rendenzvous/referral system
(as proposed in hip) instead of multiple MAs for each LIN6 node? 


> Finally, i really don't understand why the mapping agent is needed in the
> multi-homed environment. I mean, i do understand that the MA is needed for
> mobility, but i think it is not needed for multihoming. In the noid
> proposal, the mechanism is similar (i think) but only the dns is used. This
> is good because you don't add an additional critical device and you reduce
> the packet exchanges (you don't have to query the MA)
 
true. But, noid assumes that locator set does not change frequently. So, DNS
is a better canditate. For frequent locator updates, we need something other 
than DNS.  But, locator changes will be frequent in a simultaneous site multi
home & mobility/ad-hoc environment.