OK for the 1st case, but in the second case (the nemo has 2 home
networks), I would rather see the multihoming occuring between the
nemo and the home network.
home network 1
| _AR
| _-p1/56-|-|_|- p1/48 -- Internet
|-|_| MR _
| -p2/56-|-|_|- p2/48 -- Internet
| AR
home network 2
However, when we are considering a nemo that has multiple attachments
points, and for instance only one nemo prefix, then the fundamental
assumption of multi6 solution is no longer valid, since the nemo has a
single prefix. I guess that in these cases, the usefulness of the
multi6 solution will diminish.
Agree. In such case, I wouldn't consider the nemo as a "site" therefore
the site-multihoming solution wouldn't apply.
But anyway, i fell that it is very important to determine which parts
of the nemo multihoming problem can be addressed with multi6 and which
parts will require additional tools.
Identifying which parts can be addressed by existing solutions of WG is
something that we should definitely clarify in
draft-ietf-nemo-multihoming-issues.