Re: on the point of mobility & multihoming

[Kurt Erik Lindqvist <kurtis@kurtis.pp.se>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


On 2004-03-09, at 20.56, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:

> Obviously there are many details that will differ in practice, but 
> multiaddressing is multiaddressing regardless of how it's first 
> approached. However, I'm not sure if adding all the mobility 
> requirements to our list at this time is helpful, the same way I'm not 
> convinced rehashing policy and load balancing *now* is helpful. If we 
> can come up with a synthesis of what's on the table now that is sound 
> both in architecture and security, there should be ample opportunity 
> to add the other stuff later. Granted, there is a slight chance we 
> paint ourselves in a corner with regards to those issues now, but I'm 
> willing to take that risk for the sake of focussing the discussion so 
> we can achieve some results.
>

While I am sure that we at one point will start to see convergence in 
the requirements for multi6 and mobility, I actually would like to 
leave mobility our for now. The scope of multi6 is wide enough as it 
is. Let's look at this problem first. Once we have a better 
understanding of the impact and of architectural analysis we need to 
get input from a number of sources. Applications and mobility tends to 
be highest on my list.

I am just afraid that if we start mixing mobility in from the 
beginning, we will be in way over our heads...

- - kurtis -

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 8.0.3

iQA/AwUBQE7J8aarNKXTPFCVEQIcfgCgr+BDaSakVoTs7rgg2eEja7uLQSEAnjgl
NTsS7aqQVMt0FJ4NVe9TLAEa
=ShMP
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----