Subject: Under IESG review: draft-ietf-multi6-multihoming-requirements-06

From: Alex Zinin <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2003 21:11:13 -0700

This is a short one, but supposed to be important.
Please sanity-check by end of Wed.
Thanks.

-- 
Alex
http://www.psg.com/~zinin/

---

From: Russ White <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2003 07:00:37 -0400 (EDT)

This seems like the critical paragraph:

   It would be compatible with this goal for such a host to lose
   connectivity if a site lost connectivity to one transit provider,
   despite the fact that other transit provider connections were still
   operational.

Hmm... I'm not positive about this part, so I'll wait and see what others
think, but other than this, it all looks fine.

:-)

Russ

> Please sanity-check by end of Wed.

__________________________________
[email-masked] CCIE <>< Grace Alone

---

From: Jeffrey Haas <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2003 09:55:51 -0400

> think, but other than this, it all looks fine.

I'll agree - the general "goals" sound good.

Unfortunately, I think we're going to find that actually pursuing those
goals are going to make DNS and transport connection issues a serious
pain in the stack.

-- 
Jeff Haas 
NextHop Technologies