My minor substantive comments are below.
Some editorial comments were sent direct to the author.
4.2 Multi-Homing: Mobility
...
The aspect of MIPv6 which appears to present issues in the
context of
multi-homing is the return routeability mechanism. In MIPv6
identity
validity is periodically tested by return routeability of the
identity address. This regular use of a distinguished locator
as the
identity token cannot support return reachability in the
multi-homing
context in the event of extended path failure of the path that is
associated with the identity locator.
This question isn't really relevant to multi6,
Well, lots of people claim that there is a close relation between
multihoming and mobility, since both problmes require changing the
locators and keep the identifier.
Since there is an available solution for mobility, it seems quite
natural to explore if such solution is suitable for multihoming.
The problem with the available solution for mobility is that the
security mechanism used in mip is inherently incompatible with the
multihoming requirements, since it is based on reaching the
identifier.
so imho it is relevant to multihoming the explanation why the approach
used for mobility is not suitable for multihoming.