Perry; > Iljitsch van Beijnum <iljitsch@muada.com> writes: > > As it looks like the long term solution will be some kind of > > identifier/locator separation which will have a huge impact on all > > aspects of IPv6, I think this topic deserves attention from a wider > > audience than it's getting now. > > Identifier/locator separation has been a topic of conversation at the > IETF for at least the last decade if not longer. In spite of this > continuous interest, an actual fruitful proposal has yet to arrive. A problem was that multi6 WG has been required to first produce requirement document. It is just recently that so many people recognize it not a productive approach. > I > highly recommend attempting to do a fully worked proposal complete > with documents before bringing up the topic in a broad audience -- it > will increase your credibility markedly. Meanwhile, I wrote an ID draft-ohta-e2e-multihoming-03.txt on general architecture of scalable multihoming. Then, we designed and implemented a solution based on LIN6 proposal. Paper on it is available at: http://www.lab1.kuis.kyoto-u.ac.jp/~arifumi/paper/saint2003html/ Masataka Ohta