[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: IPv6 Multi-homing BOF at NANOG 35
vijay gill wrote:
Brian E Carpenter wrote:
How then does the ISP perform any traffic engineering if all of the
control is in
the end-host? That needs a _lot_ of focus because ISPs aren't going
to put their
COGS into the hands of their end users.
See the TLV discussion that Jason started. While I'm not sure he has
the right mechanism, there is definitely a requirement for hosts
to switch locators on request from a TE function as well as on outage.
I am assuming all hosts are hostile. Now what.
This is absolutely false on a corporate network, which is
a major use case for shim6. I know that may not be the context
that Nanog normally thinks about. Also, it will be in a subscriber's
best interests, I assume, to use the prefix that the ISP prefers,
in general. So I don't really see why hostility is relevant.
Understood, but do not forget inbound path selection or weighting or
or whatever you want to call it. That needs to be controllable from
level, not from the end hosts.
Yep. I think that is also a case where hosts will need to switch
They don't *today* because there is no mechanism yet. We need
to provide it, and the first step is basic shim6.