Re: [mif] definition of a MIF host

[<pierrick.seite at orange-ftgroup.com>]

Hi,

Sorry for this email in French sent by error to the ML... The subject is how to refer to monami6 host in MIF definition. I wished to get consensus with Nicolas and Marc before notifying the ML...

BR,
Pierrick

> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : mif-bounces at ietf.org [mailto:mif-bounces at ietf.org] De la part de
> pierrick.seite at orange-ftgroup.com
> Envoyé : vendredi 28 août 2009 10:50
> À : marc.blanchet at viagenie.ca; ietf at montavont.net
> Cc : mif at ietf.org
> Objet : Re: [mif] definition of a MIF host
> 
> Bonjour,
> 
> Désolé pour la réponse très tardive mais j'étais en congé après l'IETF.
> 
> En fait, la definition du "MIF host" est déjà compatible avec la
> définition monami6. La problématique MIF intervient dés que plusieurs
> adresses IP sont utilisées:
> 
> Extrait de la section 2:
> 
> A MIF host is defined as:
>    o  a [RFC1122] IPv4 and/or [RFC4294] IPv6 compliant host
>    o  configured with more than one IP addresses (excluding loopback,
>       link-local)
> 
> Je pense donc qu'une référence au draft monami6 pourrait suffire. Je
> propose de modifier la section " 3.3. Mobility and other IP protocols"
> comme suit:
> 
> This document assumes hosts only implementing [RFC1122] for IPv4 and
> [RFC4294] for IPv6, and not using any kind of new transport protocols. If
> definition of MIF host presents similarities with multihomed nodes [ietf-
> monami6-multihoming-motivation-scenario], it is not required for the host
> to support additional IP mobility or multihoming protocols, such as SHIM6,
> SCTP, Mobile IP, HIP, RRG, LISP or else.  Moreover, the peer of the
> connection is also not required to use these mechanisms.
> 
> Autre possibilité: modifier la section 2:
> 
> A MIF host is defined as:
>    o  a [RFC1122] IPv4 and/or [RFC4294] IPv6 compliant host
>    o  as per [ietf-monami6-multihoming-motivation-scenario], a MIF host is
> configured with more than one IP addresses (excluding loopback, link-
> local)
> 
> 
> Commentaires?
> 
> A+
> Pierrick
> 
> > -----Message d'origine-----
> > De : mif-bounces at ietf.org [mailto:mif-bounces at ietf.org] De la part de
> Marc
> > Blanchet
> > Envoyé : jeudi 30 juillet 2009 17:31
> > À : Nicolas Montavont
> > Cc : mif at ietf.org
> > Objet : Re: [mif] definition of a MIF host
> >
> > - thanks. it is in fact very good input. the monami6 definition is
> > however a bit v6 specific (eg. prefixes advertised on the link) where
> > mif shall be af agnostic. I'll adapt it for mif.
> >
> > Marc.
> >
> > Nicolas Montavont a écrit :
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > (I'm only starting to follow this group, so I hope my question was not
> > > discussed before...)
> > >
> > > I'd like to come back on the discussion on a MIF host as defined in
> > > draft-blanchet-mif-problem-statement-00.
> > >
> > > In the former WG Monami6, we worked on the following document:
> > >
> > > http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-monami6-multihoming-motivation-
> > scenario-03.txt
> > >
> > >
> > > where we also proposed a definition for a multihomed node. We came up
> > > with the following definitions:
> > >
> > >    Interface
> > >
> > >       A node's point of attachment to a link (as defined in [5])
> > >
> > >    Multihomed Node
> > >
> > >       A node (either a host or a router) is multihomed when it has
> > >       several global IPv6 addresses to choose between, i.e. in the
> > >       following cases when it is either:
> > >
> > >       *  multi-prefixed: multiple prefixes are advertised on the
> link(s)
> > >          the node is attached to, or.
> > >
> > >       *  multi-interfaced: the node has multiple interfaces to choose
> > >          between, on the same link or not.
> > >
> > > Basically it says that a node is multi-homed as soon as it has
> multiple
> > > addresses of the same scope, from which it can choose to send data
> > > packets. What was good IMHO in this definition, is that it is concise
> > > and does not try to cover all cases where you can end up in that case.
> > >
> > > So for the purpose of draft-blanchet-mif-problem-statement-00, I would
> > > suggest to keep the definition very short, and then have examples in
> > > another section that show how a host can be multi-homed / MIF (several
> > > interfaces, several administrative domains, etc).
> > >
> > > In the same sense, I think that the bullet "Communications using these
> > > IP addresses may happen simultaneous and independently." should not be
> > > in the definition, but again, in some explanations of scenarios.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Nicolas
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > mif mailing list
> > > mif at ietf.org
> > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mif
> >
> >
> > --
> > =========
> > IPv6 book: Migrating to IPv6, Wiley. http://www.ipv6book.ca
> > Stun/Turn server for VoIP NAT-FW traversal: http://numb.viagenie.ca
> > DTN news service: http://reeves.viagenie.ca
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > mif mailing list
> > mif at ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mif
> _______________________________________________
> mif mailing list
> mif at ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mif