[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: I-D ACTION:draft-arifumi-multi6-sas-policy-dist-00.txt



3.1 Multihome Site with Global-Closed Mixed Connectivity

                  ==============
                  |  Internet  |
                  ==============
                       |
         2001:db8::/32 |         3ffe:1800::/32
                  +----+-+   +-+----+
                  | ISP1 |   | ISP2 | (Closed Network)
                  +----+-+   +-+----+
                       |       |
       2001:db8:a::/48 |       | 3ffe:1800:a::/48
         (DHCP-PD')   ++-------++   (DHCP-PD')
                      | Gateway |
                      +----+----+
                           |  2001:db8:a:1::/64
                           |  3ffe:1800:a:1::/64
                           |        (RA'/DHCP')
                 ------+---+----------
                       |
                     +-+----+ 2001:db8:a:1:[EUI64]
                     | Host | 3ffe:1800:a:1:[EUI64]
                     +------+


I'm afraid I don't see why this case is of interest to multi6.
It is a case where the user site is connected to one ISP and
to one WGP (walled garden provider). This is not site multihoming
in the sense of multi6. As far as I can see, a longest match is
sufficient to tell the host which source prefix to use.

3.2 Host with Multiple Home Addresses and Connectivity to Two Global
   Networks

This is the case of interest to multi6.

...
     Note that the end nodes are notified of an address-selection policy
     that includes prefix ::/0 by both ISPs, hence a specific source
     address for ::/0 can't be determined in the Label-Rule judgment
     phase described in RFC3484. So, these entries for prefix ::/0 won't
     actually be stored in the policy table, and this policy table won't
     have any effect on source-address selection for packets that match
     ::/0. The source address in these cases will be determined by
     following rules listed in RFC3484, such as longest match with the
     destination address.

Exactly. And it is this case - when two ISPs both offer connectivity to ::/0 - that multi6 has to solve. That seems to be the case you don't help with.

     Unlike the previous example (3.1.1(iv)), normal destination-
     address-based routing doesn't specify a particular next-hop.

             Dst                        Next-Hop
             2001:db8::/32              ISP1
             ::/0                       ISP1
             3ffe:1800::/32             ISP2
             ::/0                       ISP2

i.e., it doesn't help me choose the appropriate exit router and source prefix to use for a given destination in ::/0.

That would only be possible if the table contained separate entries
for every prefix that each ISP can route to - that amounts to the
whole BGP table for each ISP - with a metric. Which certainly doesn't
scale.

    Brian