Re: multihoming goals and lear-multi6-things-to-think-about?

[Brian E Carpenter <brc@zurich.ibm.com>]

Eliot,

Agreed. Looking at some of the drafts, I had a strong impression
that some authors had read the section headings in 3582, but
not the details, which were thoroughly debated. As Kurtis said,
let's concentrate on sharpening up the questions in your draft.

   Brian

Eliot Lear wrote:
> 
> Hi Pekka,
> 
> I would not feel comfortable restating what is already written rather
> well.  It probably would cause more confusion than help.  Those who are
> actually doing the solutions should be aware of RFC 3582, and should
> have read it cover to cover and understood its context.  There's no
> substitute.
> 
> Eliot
> 
> Pekka Savola wrote:
> 
> > Hi,
> >
> > As I mentioned in the meeting, I think there is a problem in
> > understanding the multihoming goals RFC, as evidenced by a couple of
> > solutions describing e.g., how they solve traffic engineering problem.
> > (That is, we're interested of *site* traffic engineering, not *node*
> > TE.)
> >
> > Should we include a section in
> > draft-lear-multi6-things-to-think-about which tries to briefly
> > describe (again :) the actual goals of the multihoming goals RFC -- or
> > should we just stick to asking a few pointed questions in
> > draft-lear-... ?
> >
> > Opinions?
> >

-- 
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Brian E Carpenter 
Distinguished Engineer, Internet Standards & Technology, IBM