From owner-multi6@ops.ietf.org Tue Sep 24 05:37:22 2002 Received: from psg.com (smmsp@psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id FAA20917 for ; Tue, 24 Sep 2002 05:37:21 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lserv by psg.com with local (Exim 3.36 #1) id 17tm6e-000Mp5-00 for multi6-data@psg.com; Tue, 24 Sep 2002 02:35:48 -0700 Received: from mail-gw2.hursley.ibm.com ([194.196.110.19]) by psg.com with esmtp (Exim 3.36 #1) id 17tm6b-000Moo-00 for multi6@ops.ietf.org; Tue, 24 Sep 2002 02:35:45 -0700 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=mail-gw2.hursley.ibm.com) by mail-gw2.hursley.ibm.com with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 17tm6Y-0006yZ-00; Tue, 24 Sep 2002 10:35:42 +0100 Received: from [9.20.45.103] (helo=sp15en17.hursley.ibm.com) by mail-gw2.hursley.ibm.com with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 17tm6Y-0006yU-00; Tue, 24 Sep 2002 10:35:42 +0100 Received: from hursley.ibm.com (dhcp22-199.zurich.ibm.com [9.4.22.199]) by sp15en17.hursley.ibm.com (AIX4.3/8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA16534; Tue, 24 Sep 2002 10:35:41 +0100 Message-ID: <3D9031F5.9E668575@hursley.ibm.com> Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2002 11:35:49 +0200 From: Brian E Carpenter Organization: IBM X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.79 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U) X-Accept-Language: en,fr,de MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Michel Py CC: Multi6 Subject: Re: Multihoming Issues References: <2B81403386729140A3A899A8B39B046405E31A@server2000> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none version=2.31 Sender: owner-multi6@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit (Switched to the WG mailing list) Michel Py wrote: > > >> Simon Leinen wrote: > >> What is needed is some sort of feedback loop that > >> weighs the interest of multi-homing entities against > >> its impact on remote parts of the infrastructure. > > > Tony Hain wrote: > > That is the basis of the multi-6 wg requirements > > document. Unfortunately there are so many competing > > interests that it is impossible to meet them all > > with a simple solution. The end sites want > > capabilities that strain the resources of the > > service providers, and the service providers want > > approaches that are non-starters for the end sites. > > Agree with Tony. There is always something in any solution that would > not meet the multi6 requirements. As for most requirements documents. That is no reason not to publish the document we have. Bian