On Mon, 29 Dec 2008, Marshall Eubanks wrote: > On Dec 29, 2008, at 10:02 PM, Tony Finch wrote: >> On Mon, 29 Dec 2008, Noel Chiappa wrote: >>> >>> I have been thinking this for some time too, and it's especially >>> true/clear when the multi-homing in question is site multi-homing, >>> and not host-multihoming (which is much rarer, is my impression). >> >> Most networkable consumer electronics ships with at least two network >> interfaces. Host multihoming is only rare because it doesn't work. > > Why do you say it doesn't work ? The kind of multihoming I am talking about is where you are using multiple links for redundncy or resilience - i.e. the same reasons for site multihoming. I did not mean other kinds of multihoming, such as multiple addresses on the same link (which I don't think should be called multihoming) nor links which connect to different networks - which includes VPNs and gateways/routers. (The site-level equivalent of the latter is private peering.) The kind of multihoming I mean is the kind that trivially supports mobility as a degenerate case, since mobility is just repeated failover. Tony. -- f.anthony.n.finch <dot@xxxxxxxx> http://dotat.at/ ROCKALL: SOUTHEASTERLY 5 OR 6, OCCASIONALLY 7, BUT 4 IN NORTH AT FIRST. SLIGHT OR MODERATE, OCCASIONALLY ROUGH. RAIN OR SHOWERS. MODERATE OR GOOD. _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf