Re: [v6ops] I-D Action:draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-bis-00.txt

[james woodyatt <[e-mail]>]

On Mar 15, 2011, at 13:47 , Hemant Singh (shemant) wrote:
> [I boggled at the claim:]
>> On Mar 15, 2011, at 11:56 , Hemant Singh (shemant) wrote:
>>> 
>>> The power grid folks already came to the Beijing IETF showing us their cpe router devices will force the home to be multihomed.
>> 
>> Huh?  Where is the draft that documents this?
> 
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-herbst-v6ops-cpeenhancements-00

I read that draft when it was first published.  It documents no such thing.

> I am sure there is other text in the document that points out two
> different routers in the home connected to two different SPs (one SP is
> the home's DSL or broadband SP and the other SP is the Power Grid
> company with their IPv6 CE router for the home) and thus one has a
> multihomed home.  Anyway, you should look at Tom Herbst's prezo given to
> the v6ops at the IETF79 in Beijing that clearly shows a multihomed
> network.  Note also that multihomed involves both a multihomed WAN and
> LAN for CE Router.

There is no language in the draft respecting site-multihoming of residential networks.  There is the somewhat ambiguous section 2.3 "Intra-network routing with multiple internet connected CPEs" which says this:

   As network segments are interconnected, and CPE devices become border
   gateways for new bordering network segments, a routing protocol like
   RIPng needs to be supported.  As noted for ULA delegation, the CPE
   needs to automatically detect the need in support for inter-segment
   routing and provide support automatically.

Admittedly, this could be interpreted to mean multi-homing at residential sites.  Maybe there was a presentation slide set in Beijing that explained clearly what this section is supposed to mean, but if so then I missed it.  Was there such a presentation?

My abiding and overarching question, which I have been asking for more than a year now without satisfactory answer, remains unanswered: what is forcing this to happen, and why are other obvious alternatives unsatisfactory?


--
james woodyatt <[e-mail]>
member of technical staff, core os networking