[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: on the point of mobility & multihoming
On 3-mrt-04, at 3:35, <email@example.com> wrote:
From today's session, Dave & Geoff discussed multihoming vs.
a working group I chair, we've had similar discussions and from a
layer, maintaining a session during a multihoming change and a
mobility change can be quite similar. I second Dave's comment that
trying to solve two things at once can be never-ending. He also
mentioned that solving two
problems seperately can lead to incompatible or extremely complex
that don't interoperate well.
Multiaddress mulithoming and mobility solutions must incorporate the
1. multiplexing in the presence of more than one address pair
2. adding/removing addresses
3. for multihoming: failover
4. for mobility: rendezvous
It would be stupid to have two sets of mechanisms for 1. and 2., as the
complexity of having to implement them both such that they can work
reliably in the presence of the other is sure to be much worse than
simply sharing them between mobility and multihoming. Unfortunately the
ways in which current MIPv6 does these are sub-par, so we need to have
something better. The logical conclusion is that the MIP people will
have to throw their stuff out and use the new mechanisms, but I don't
think we're ready to have that fight quite yet.