Subject: RE: Multihoming by IP Layer Address Rewriting (MILAR)

From: "Christian Huitema" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 4 Sep 2001 12:16:40 -0700

> From: RJ Atkinson [mailto:[email-masked]] 
> At 09:27 04/09/01, Ramakrishna Gummadi wrote:
> >Hi,
> >I don't think that it is a good idea to assume that every
> >multihomed host has a DNS entry (for whatever reason)
> 
> Today if a host doesn't have a DNS entry, it generally has NIL
> incoming connectivity.  The Internet Architecture expects hosts
> to have DNS entries, so such an assumption and constraint
> is totally reasonable.

Ran, this is false. Game stations, and PC running video-games, obtain
incoming connectivity by registering their address in a game lobby.
Instant messaging allows you to invite a peer to set up a connection to
your address, for purposes such as file transfer, application sharing,
or phone calls. SIP proxies allows you to receive invitation at whatever
address you happen to be registered with. Napster clients receive file
transfer requests because they register their addresses in the server.
Nodes in peer-to-peer network obtain incoming connectivity by somehow
publishing their address in the peer-to-peer cloud.

There is no dependency between connectivity and the DNS, and there
should not be. A multi-homing solution that depends on the DNS is a non
starter.

-- Christian Huitema

---

From: Iljitsch van Beijnum <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 4 Sep 2001 21:49:16 +0200 (CEST)

> should not be. A multi-homing solution that depends on the DNS is a non

Are you saying that if there is a good way to implement multihoming that
requires a globally distributed hierarchical database system, we should
create a new one?

Iljitsch van Beijnum