RE: multi6-functional-dec and re-homing

[<john.loughney@nokia.com>]

Hi Jari,
> 
> >  >  In particular, the benefits would be the capability of establishing
> >  >  new communications through the alternative paths.
> > 
> > Well, that is an intrinsic property of IPv6 surely - if a host has
> > two addresses, and one fails, you can try the other. But since we
> > can only get ULID to locator translation with a shim at both ends,
> > I just don't see what is brought to this property by the shim;
> > both ends will have to use the new locators at the ULP interface,
> > so the shim has no work to do.
> 
> I guess Marcelo is talking about the logic to try another source
> address. The actual shim6 protocol would not be of use here.

I agree that this is something that would be good to do; however, my
question is - is this a shim6 specific task?
 
> So, the question we have now is whether the SHIM6 WG's RFCs
> should specifically deal with the source address selection
> problem when the other end is plain old IPv6 node. Or not.

I might be confused here, but I think Brian was suggesting that
to use shim6, both ends need to have shim6, otherwise both ends
use 'normal' mechansims.  Do you see a case where one end would use
shim6 and the other would not?

John