Subject: RE: [nemo] draft-ng-nemo-multihoming-issues-01.txt

From: Chan-Wah Ng <[email-masked]>
Date: 20 Jun 2003 17:55:10 +0800

Hello, Eun Kyoung,

On Fri, 2003-06-20 at 17:05, Paik, Eun Kyoung wrote:
> Hi, Chan-Wah,
> 
> > > IMHO, we'd better to define the problems and make a consensus on
> them,
> > > since R12 in the requirement draft defines that the NEMO solution
> must
> > > function for multihoming.
> > 
> > Of-course, that's the purpose of the draft. Would you care to list
> > those problems you'd encountered?
> 
> I and my collegue Ho-sik classified the problems into three main parts
> as follows.
> The three categories are devided again into many sub-problems.
> Insted of listing all of them at once, we may start from following
> considerations.
> 
> 1. Egress interface availability and selection:
> Multiple egress interfaces of MR can be used simultaneously or one at
> a time ?

I don't see any reason to prevent them from being used simultaneously. 
If not used simultaneously, one can argue that it is not multihomed.

> If only a egress interface is used at a time, how to select it ? and
> who select it ?
> 
I personally feel that selection of egress interface is an
implementation issue.  But there may be something I missed.

> 2. Scalability: 
> draft-montavont-mobileip-mmi-00.txt and 
> draft-wakikawa-multiplecoa-00.txt are proposed for different
> scenarios.
> Do we need a scalable and flexible solution for all the eight
> variations of (w, x, y) mentioned in your draft ?
> 

The 8 variations are just different possible scenarios.  They share some
similar set of problems.  Ideally, we should have a solution that solves
all the problems, but that is subjected to (a) scope of NEMO WG, (b)
practicability, and (c) significance of the problem.

> With multiple HAs, there are further issues since it may have multiple
> HoAs.
> Are we going to allow multiple HoAs ? Then we have much more problems
> to discuss.

Which are ... ?  It will useful to list the problems so that the WG can
make a decision whether multiple HoAs should be supported or not.

> 
> 3. RO Considerations:
> The way of egress interface availability and selection will affect RO.

Hmmm.. most likely so.  Highly dependent on the RO solution used, which
may be a bit early.  

> 
> I think we also have to analyze security considerations.
> 

Definitely.  Any inputs from you (or other members in the WG) on this
regard?

>From your 3 main categories, I see the need to quickly address the
Scalablity problem you mentioned.  You might want to elaborate on
that.   Similarly for egress interface selection.  As for RO, we may be
able to wait a while.

/rgds
/cwng

---

From: Chan-Wah Ng <[email-masked]>
Date: 20 Jun 2003 17:55:10 +0800

Hello, Eun Kyoung,

/rgds
/cwng