[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: RE: questions about draft-wen-ipv6-rsra-opt-multihoming-00
I am saying that I want to you be aware that shim6 is approaching the
problem with a particular framework (shim6) in mind.
if your contribution is relevant to that framework then of course this is
good - if you head off into alternative multi-6 solutions that have nothing
to do with shim6, then maybe you should reconsider whether to cc shim6 in
At 10:46 AM 9/06/2006, CTO WEN Haibo wrote:
I am wondering the exact meaning of your email. Are you meaning that
some discussions in this particular thread have less relevance with
shim6 or the whole thread has less relelevance to shim6?
This document tries to solve the source address selection and exit
router selection, which is related to the following working item from
the charter of shim:
"In addition to the network layer shim solution, the shim6 WG is
specifically chartered to work on:
Solutions for site exit router selection that work when each ISP
uses ingress filtering, i.e. when the chosen site exit needs to
be related to the source address chosen by the host. This site
exit router selection and the associated address selection
process should work whether or not the peer site supports
the shim6 protocol."
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Geoff Huston [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
> Sent: 2006å¹´6æ??9æ?¥ 07:00
> To: CTO WEN Haibo; Greg Daley
> Cc: Lawrence Zou; email@example.com
> Subject: RE: RE: questions about
> Could please I remind all of you in this particular mail
> thread that the
> charter of shim6 is to refine and develop one particular approach to
> multi-homing, and it is definitely NOT to rehash over the
> multi6 discussion
> of "all possible approaches to multihoming".
> Accordingly, please think for a second about the relevance of your
> contribution to shim6 before including shim6 in your cc list.
> At 03:38 PM 7/06/2006, CTO WEN Haibo wrote:
> >Hi Greg,
> >Please see the response below. Thanks.
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Greg Daley [mailto:Greg.Daley@eng.monash.edu.au]
> > > Sent: 2006?Ãª6??7Ã¨? 11:15
> > > To: CTO WEN Haibo
> > > Cc: Lawrence Zou; firstname.lastname@example.org; email@example.com
> > > Subject: Re: RE: questions about
> > > draft-wen-ipv6-rsra-opt-multihoming-00
> > >....
> > > > The core of this multi-homing information option is
> that to provide
> > > > someextra information along with prefix information
> option to help
> > > > host do
> > > > selection, and the host uses the prefix once it finds
> the matching
> > > > information in multi-homing information option.
> > > > ISP name is a sub-option, ISP name is a generalized
> name, the IPTV
> > > > service provider can name itself as "IPTV", Internet
> > > service provider
> > > > can name itself as "HSI", these names also indicates
> their service
> > > > type.Maybe I haven't made this very clear in the draft.
> Of course,
> > > > any other option can be also defined under this
> architecture, for
> > > > example, what
> > > > kind of service the isp can provide, the qos parameter, etc.
> > > > Currently,only a few suboption have been defined.
> > > >
> > > > Using this multi-homing option, router can priodically
> > > > the
> > > > ISP's ability and related information.
> > > >
> > >
> > > I think it's a much better fit to provide this
> (changeable) operator
> > > related information using 802.21 media independent
> > > information services.
> >802.21 is developing standards to enable handover and
> >between heterogeneous network types including both 802 and non 802
> >networks. 802.21 is running below IP layer. However, SAAC
> procedure is
> >running in IP layer.
> >You know, in multi-homing site, each router will advertise
> RA which contains
> >IPv6 prefix information, and the interface of host will
> receive all this
> >RA. The
> >standard Stateless Address Auto-Configuration doesn't provide extra
> >information to help prefix selection. Multi-homing
> informaiton option is for
> >this purpose.
> > >
> > > With respect to access network related configuration information,
> > > we already have DHCPv6 for that, and more specific route options
> > > for Router Discovery.
> >In IPv6, there are two ways for address auto-configuration,
> i.e., stateful
> >configuration based on DHCPv6, and stateless configuration.
> It seems there is
> >no standard that says only DHCPv6 can be used in access
> network and SAAC
> >is forbidden.
> > >
> > > Router Discovery is for prefix and next hop
> determination. Let's not
> > > make it complicated for other reasons.
> >More information along with prefix information option in RA,
> will help
> >host select
> >the appropriate prefix to form its IPv6 global address and
> also select its
> >router. It's not trying to make things complicated. Without
> this effort,
> >host cannot
> >find the appropriate prefix and exit router.