North American Network Operators Group

Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: IPv6 news

  • From: John Payne
  • Date: Fri Oct 14 23:57:48 2005

On Oct 14, 2005, at 12:10 PM, Daniel Roesen wrote:

designing a solution
which misses the stated requirements of many folks actually operating
So far it's missing some of the stated requirements (reasons for multihoming) listed in the charter... well I was going to cut-n-paste like I did to my email to shim6 dated Oct 4 2005, but it seems to have been removed in an update... so I'll cut-n-paste from that email:

For the purposes of redundancy, load sharing, operational policy or
cost, a site may be multi-homed, with the site's network having
connections to multiple IP service providers.

So the IETF identified 4 reasons to multihome. Of those 4, shim6 ignores at least 2 of them (operational policy and cost), and so far as I can see glosses over load sharing.
I'd actually redefine load sharing to load (im)balancing, but that may just be pedantics.

I don't recall seeing any followup to my question, and it's not showing up in the list archive so maybe there's something wrong with my list subscription (although I have had responses to other postings... which are also not in the archive)