RFC 3178 mh (was Re: I-D ACTION:draft-huston-multi6-architectures-00.txt)

[marcelo bagnulo braun <marcelo@it.uc3m.es>]

Hi Pekka,

A couple of questions about RFC 3178 multihoming...

El 20/05/2004, a las 10:21, Pekka Savola escribió:
>
[...]
>                                      However, this draft does not
>          address another major drawback of the RFC 3178 approach, that
>          it does not protect against the complete failure of one or 
> more
>          connected ISPs.
>
> ==> I think this is something where one should make a reality check.
> How often is it that the _whole_ ISP fails?  Pretty much _never_,

IMHO the problem is that RFC 3178 multihoming situation not only fails 
when the complete ISP fails, but it also fails when
- one of the access routers of the ISPs fail,
- one of the exit routers of the site fail
- one of the links between the ISPs and their upstream provider fail

While i agree that probably the complete failure of the ISP may be a 
low probability event, i guess that the above mentioned events may be 
more common.

The other reality check that i would like to do is how common is RFC 
3178? if it is not very common, what do you think are the reasons for 
its non adoption?

Regards, marcelo

> unless you count 1-man small ISPs which don't even have redundant
> connectivity and routers (and we shouldn't care about this).