RE: questions about draft-wen-ipv6-rsra-opt-multihoming-00

[Lawrence Zou <zou.rong@huawei.com>]

I am not sure the topic  in your document is in the domain of  shim6,in
fact ,I think it will be bettter to discuss in IPV6 WG because you want
to add option in RS/RA message.

>-----Original Message-----
>From: CTO WEN Haibo [mailto:Haibo.WEN@alcatel-sbell.com.cn] 
>Sent: Wednesday, June 07, 2006 9:34 AM
>To: Kurt Erik Lindqvist; Lawrence Zou
>Cc: multi6@ops.ietf.org
>Subject: RE: questions about draft-wen-ipv6-rsra-opt-multihoming-00
>
>
>Kurtis,
>
>Thank you for your reminder.
>I have subscribed the shim6 WG, and also forwarded the 
>discussion in that group.
>
>Lawrence, maybe you should subscribe shim6 WG, too.
>
>Best regards,
>
>-Haibo
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Kurt Erik Lindqvist [mailto:kurtis@kurtis.pp.se]
>> Sent: 2006年6月7日 08:50
>> To: Lawrence Zou
>> Cc: CTO WEN Haibo; multi6@ops.ietf.org
>> Subject: Re: questions about draft-wen-ipv6-rsra-opt-multihoming-00
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> I'd like to point out that the multi6 WG has completed it's work and
>> should be closed down - and as soon as that happens I will 
>> close this  
>> mailinglist.
>> 
>> - kurtis -
>> 
>> On 6 jun 2006, at 06.04, Lawrence Zou wrote:
>> 
>> > hi,wen:
>> >
>> >      i have read you draft.  Although there are some strong
>> technical
>> > points in this document,  i still think there are some big problem:
>> >
>> > 1. I noticed  that in all 3 Scenarios, the RS message must
>> include ISP
>> > name sub-option,so,is it a "MUST"  sub-optinon that be
>> include in the
>> > Multi-homing Information option? if it is true,what will it
>> happen if
>> > the host don't know the name of the ISP? I think in the 
>Scenarios of 
>> > stateless addres autoconfigue, it is not necessary for host to know
>> the topology
>> > of the network and the name of the ISP.
>> > in your draft ,all hosts know clearly which ISP they belong to ,I
>> > think
>> > we can distinguish them using some kinds of  VLAN techonoly.
>> >
>> > 2.In Scenario 3,you mention the equipment of "layer2 CPE
>> ".so what the
>> > difference is that with "layer3 CPE "? In my understand
>> ,the layer2
>> > CPE
>> > is a layer2 equipmnet ,so in the section 3.3
>> >    Step (b) : Base on the information in Multi-homing Information
>> > option
>> >               , layer 2 access node can forward this RS to 
>> the correct
>> >               edge router of the desired ISP without
>> sending it to the
>> >               router that will not respond this RS.	
>> >
>> >  can layer2 equipment do this kind of thing?	
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> 
>> 
>