Re: [addr-select-dt] slide to 6man presentation

[Tim Chown <[e-mail]>]

On 26 Jul 2010, at 12:54, Arifumi Matsumoto wrote:

> 
> However, we should not mention all the changes. To make it simple and easy to focus on the important points.

That's fine :)

>> 
>> - in dynamic/unmanaged networks using routing hints for address selection *may* be more appropriate
> 
> I cannot get what exactly mean by this sentence.
> Do you assume a environment where a mobile node with multiple interface can make use of routing information for address selection ?

Or a node which has multiple addresses from the site being multi-homed, by using for example an ICMP query to an edge router or route server.

>> 
>> - the problem of handling policy conflict is a host issue, the method to distribute the policy is a network issue - we focus here on the network issue since the host issue is broadly applicable to many configuration parameters
> 
> Important point.
> I knew that, but I could not find a space for that.
> Maybe we need to add some slides to elaborate.

Maybe add after slide 2 and push your policy conflict reference to the slide after that?    I think that would flow well.

> 
>> - we should avoid delaying progression of a 3484 policy distribution method applicable to managed enterprise networks
> 
> Not only enterprise networks, but for networks where multiple upstream networks can talk with each other.

Yes, sorry, I am biased of course :)

>> I think this material could fit in a new Slide 3 and then you continue the arifumi-6man-addr-select-conflict reference after that, to keep the flow.
>> 
>> I see a new Troan multihoming draft came out this morning, I've not checked what changes there are yet.
> 
> The main changes are about the legacy host support. Support by using NAT66 to the wrongly source-addressed packets.

OK, thanks.

Tim