Subject: Document Action: 'Enterprise Multihoming using Provider-Assigned IPv6 Addresses without Network Prefix Translation: Requirements and Solutions' to Informational RFC (draft-ietf-rtgwg-enterprise-pa-multihoming-12.txt)

From: The IESG <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2019 07:23:55 -0700

The IESG has approved the following document:
- 'Enterprise Multihoming using Provider-Assigned IPv6 Addresses without
   Network Prefix Translation: Requirements and Solutions'
  (draft-ietf-rtgwg-enterprise-pa-multihoming-12.txt) as Informational RFC

This document is the product of the Routing Area Working Group.

The IESG contact persons are Alvaro Retana, Deborah Brungard and Martin
Vigoureux.

A URL of this Internet Draft is:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-rtgwg-enterprise-pa-multihoming/

Technical Summary

   Connecting an enterprise site to multiple ISPs using provider-
   assigned addresses is difficult without the use of some form of
   Network Address Translation (NAT).  Much has been written on this
   topic over the last 10 to 15 years, but it still remains a problem
   without a clearly defined or widely implemented solution.  Any
   multihoming solution without NAT requires hosts at the site to have
   addresses from each ISP and to select the egress ISP by selecting a
   source address for outgoing packets.  It also requires routers at the
   site to take into account those source addresses when forwarding
   packets out towards the ISPs.

   This document attempts to define a complete solution to this problem.
   It covers the behavior of routers to forward traffic taking into
   account source address, and it covers the behavior of host to select
   appropriate source addresses.  It also covers any possible role that
   routers might play in providing information to hosts to help them
   select appropriate source addresses.  In the process of exploring
   potential solutions, this document also makes explicit requirements
   for how the solution would be expected to behave from the perspective
   of an enterprise site network administrator.

Working Group Summary

   There was significant discussion on the list and, as a result, the document went through six revisions.
   However, there was general consensus that the document should be published

Document Quality

   The document does not specify a protocol. However, it does describe a real operational problem.

Personnel

   Ron Bonica is Document Shepherd.
   Martin Vigoureux is Area Director