15 Oct
2005
15 Oct
'05
5:23 p.m.
On Oct 15, 2005, at 3:29 PM, Tony Li wrote:
So the IETF identified 4 reasons to multihome. Of those 4, shim6 ignores at least 2 of them (operational policy and cost), and so far as I can see glosses over load sharing.
If you have a solution that satisfies all requirements, you should contribute it. Shim6 is indeed a partial solution to the stated requirements. There was no tractable solution found to all requirements, and to not solve any of the issues was seen as basically fatal.
I don't have an acceptable solution... however, I am getting tired of shim6 being pushed as *the* solution to site rehoming, when at best it's an end node rehoming solution.