|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2001 09:15:09 -0400 From: Joe Abley <jabley@automagic.org> To: nanog@merit.edu Message-ID: <20010626091509.I27658@buddha.home.automagic.org> Reply-To: jabley@automagic.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu [number 5 in a series of unscientific surveys] If you currently multi-home between two or more providers using IPv4: + why do you do it? What are the high-level goals you are hoping to achieve? Are you finding that you are achieving them? + how often does your traffic shift between transit providers due to a failure of some kind triggering a re-homing? + how often do you manually shift traffic, and why? Just inbound traffic? Or outbound too? + what impact does a manual or automatic shift in traffic between providers have to your users? Do their TCP sessions break? Or do you think they normally stay alive, maybe after a delay? What makes you think this? + what is *bad* about the way that multi-homing works in IPv4? + what is good about it? Context is an attempt to nail down some requirements for a multi-homing architecture in IPv6 (one that doesn't incorporate exciting up-and-to-the- right state explosion in the DFZ). I can summarise private replies if there is interest. http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/multi6-charter.html http://www.automagic.org/~jabley/draft-ietf-multi6-multihoming-requirements-01.txt http://www.automagic.org/~jabley/draft-ietf-multi6-v4-multihoming-00.txt Joe
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |