Re: [mif] Five additional problem statements for mif ---- hostrouting

[Min Hui <[e-mail]>]

Hi, Liuyin

Thanks for correcting, I'll modify this sentence.

Thank you very much.

- Hui Min

2009/3/18, liuyin <[e-mail]>:
>
> Hi,hui
> I think there is a problem in the description. Please see inline. Thanks.
> Best regards.
>
> liuyin
>
>
> 2009-03-18 ________________________________
>
> liuyin ________________________________
>
> 发件人： Min Hui
> 发送时间： 2009-03-18  11:45:44
> 收件人： mif
> 抄送：
> 主题： Re: [mif] Five additional problem statements for mif ---- hostrouting
>
> Hi, everyone
> This is the first one: Host routing
> The host routing currently follows the default gateway
> mechanism,
> which will choose the unify gateway among more than one
> default routes
> ('0.0.0.0'), the detail is described in RFC1122. The
> default gateway
> guarantees there always has a route to network when the
> host can not
> find a specific route for a datagram in the route table.
> But when it comes to multiple interfaces situation, the
> default
> gateway mechanism in host routing will let all the IP
> flows go out
> through one interface except some specific assignment
> (e.g. static
> routing item). In this case, the applications can’t use
> different
> interfaces which are the aim of multiple interfaces.
>
> ==> This sentence makes me confused. I think it should express like this:
>  In this case, the applications can't use different interfaces, which
> against
> the aim of multiple interfaces.
>
>  The reason is the
> application will not appoint a source address in most
> situations
> currently. The source address will be determined by host
> operating
> system after querying the host routing table, if there
> is any
> available routing item for the destination, the
> corresponding source
> address of this routing item will be selected. In most
> cases, the
> routing item of default gateway will be used, so that
> every
> application will use the same interface.
> In conclusion, the above host routing mechanism is one of
> problems in
> the way to maintain multiple interfaces work
> simultaneously.
> - Hui Min
> 2009/3/18 Min Hui <[e-mail]>:
> > Hi, all mif fans
> >
> > I have viewed the agenda of mif bof, and I notice some
> problem
> > statements for mif are not concluded in the current ps
> documents which
> > will be discussed in the meeting.
> > So I post these additional problems in the mail list for
> discussion,
> > all of them come from the draft
> > "draft-hui-ip-multiple-connections-ps-02" with some
> modifications
> > according to the comments received recently.
> > There are five problems in addition, which will be
> proposed in five
> > separated mails in order to have sufficient discussion
> for each of
> > them.
> > Five mails will be sent out following this mail, the
> structure is:
> > 1. Host routing
> > 2. DNS selection
> > 3. Different metric measurements
> > 4. Source address selection for IPv4
> > 5. TOS consideration
> >
> > Any comment is welcomed, and thanks for your notice.
> >
> > BR,
> > - Hui Min
> >
> _______________________________________________
> mif mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mif