Re: on the point of mobility & multihoming

[Dave Crocker <dhc@dcrocker.net>]

john,

jlnc> that don't interoperate well.  Could we restrict ourselves to multihoming,
jlnc> but perhaps the authors of the proposals add a section on Mobility Considerations,
jlnc> so we don't run into incompatiple solutions?

 The reasons that -- for this topic -- I think it is quite important
 to look at mobility and multihoming together are:

 1.  My own perusal is convincing me that they have more in common
 than they have different

 2.  Focusing only on one leads to assumptions that can be overly
 restrictive.  For example, one might think of multhoming addresses as
 being too stable.  Or one might think of mobility as only a trade
 from one address to another.

In his typically frustrating style, of raising really good, basic
points, Geoff pointed out that one can be mobile AND multihomed.

If we focus on one and not the other, we are not likely to deal with
this breadth and overlap adequately.

d/
--
 Dave Crocker <dcrocker-at-brandenburg-dot-com>
 Brandenburg InternetWorking <www.brandenburg.com>
 Sunnyvale, CA  USA <tel:+1.408.246.8253>