[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: draft minutes from London multi6 session
At 10:04 AM -0400 8/22/01, Thomas Narten wrote:
>Brian E Carpenter <email@example.com> writes:
>> I don't quite understand from the minutes whether there was decision
>> to merge the multi6 requirements darft with Howard's. Could someone
>The decision was not made to merge to merge the two. Indeed, my sense
>of the discussion is that there was quite a bit of concern with doing
>a merge, as that would broaden the focus of the requirements document
>quite a lot beyond what the group has so far been discussing.
>I believe it would make more sense to extract those aspects in
>draft-berkowitz-multireq-02.txt that relate directly to IP
>connectivity issues when a site connects to multiple ISPs. It would be
>good for someone (Howard?) to summarize to the list what those
>requirements would be.
I certainly can do that. My sense is that the issues are slightly
broader than connecting to multiple ISPs. Scenarios (e.g., RFC 1998)
where one AS has BGP connectivity to multiple POPs of the same ISP, I
believe, are within scope. Such scenarios vary in V4 depending on
whether the address space is PA or PI, which might not be a V6 issue.
A brief note on the evolving discussions of aggregation-by-community
(several proposals) might also be in order.
Of course, simply as individual authors, we'd greatly appreciate
comments on the document as a whole. I'd like a reality check if it
would be worth advancing to Informational in its present form.
Since there are many multihoming -- whatever that is :-) -- experts
on this list, I'd also like to get a sense of whether it's time for a
BOF on the broader area of general multihoming, presumably in the ops