a radical proposal (Re: protocols that don't meet the need...)

Joe Abley jabley at isc.org
Fri Feb 17 05:13:48 UTC 2006

On 16-Feb-2006, at 13:32, Edward B. DREGER wrote:

> JA> I get the feeling that there's a lot of solutions-designing  
> going on in this
> JA> thread without the benefit of prior problem-stating.
> Problem:
> Consumers want to multihome.

That sentence needs profound expansion before it's going to be  
reasonable to assess any proposed solution.

(Why do they want to multi-home? What do they hope to achieve?  
Redundancy? Load sharing? What trade-offs are reasonable, e.g. with  
respect to the stability of individual sessions across re-homing  
events? In a transaction carried between two hosts, do clients and  
servers have different requirements?)

We tried to catch a reasonable number of motivations in RFC 3582, but  
I bet we missed plenty.


More information about the NANOG mailing list