Browse Prior Art Database

Things Multihoming in IPv6 (MULTI6) Developers Should Think About (RFC4219)

IP.com Disclosure Number: IPCOM000130591D
Original Publication Date: 2005-Oct-01
Included in the Prior Art Database: 2005-Oct-28
Document File: 13 page(s) / 25K

Publishing Venue

Internet Society Requests For Comment (RFCs)

Related People

E. Lear: AUTHOR

Abstract

This document specifies a set of questions that authors should be prepared to answer as part of a solution to multihoming with IPv6. The questions do not assume that multihoming is the only problem of interest, nor do they demand a more general solution.

This text was extracted from an ASCII text file.
This is the abbreviated version, containing approximately 11% of the total text.

Network Working Group                                            E. Lear
Request for Comments: 4219                                 Cisco Systems
Category: Informational                                     October 2005


   Things Multihoming in IPv6 (MULTI6) Developers Should Think About

Status of this Memo

   This memo provides information for the Internet community.  It does
   not specify an Internet standard of any kind.  Distribution of this
   memo is unlimited.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2005).

Abstract

   This document specifies a set of questions that authors should be
   prepared to answer as part of a solution to multihoming with IPv6.
   The questions do not assume that multihoming is the only problem of
   interest, nor do they demand a more general solution.

Table of Contents

   1. Introduction ....................................................3
      1.1. Reading this Document ......................................3
   2. On the Wire Behavior ............................................4
      2.1. How will your solution solve the multihoming problem? ......4
      2.2. At what layer is your solution applied, and how? ...........4
      2.3. Why is the layer you chose the correct one? ................4
      2.4. Does your solution address mobility? .......................4
      2.5. Does your solution expand the size of an IP packet? ........4
      2.6. Will your solution add additional latency? .................4
      2.7. Can multihoming capabilities be negotiated
           end-to-end during a ........................................4
      2.8. Do you change the way fragmenting is handled? ..............5
      2.9. Are there any layer 2 implications to your proposal? .......5
   3. Identifiers and Locators ........................................5
      3.1. Uniqueness .................................................5
      3.2. Does your solution provide for a split between
           identifiers and ............................................5
      3.3. What is the lifetime of a binding from an
           identifier to a locator? ...................................5
      3.4. How is the binding updated? ................................5
      3.5. How does a host know its identity? .........................5
      3.6. Can a host have multiple identifiers? ......................5

Lear                         Informational                      [Page 1]
RFC 4219             MULTI6 Solution Questionnaire          October 2005


      3.7. If you have separate locators and identifiers, how
           will they be ...............................................5
   ...