Re: questions about draft-wen-ipv6-rsra-opt-multihoming-00

I'd like to point out that the multi6 WG has completed it's work and  
should be closed down - and as soon as that happens I will close this  
mailinglist.

- kurtis -

On 6 jun 2006, at 06.04, Lawrence Zou wrote:

> hi,wen:
>
>      i have read you draft.  Although there are some strong technical
> points in this document,  i still think there are some big problem:
>
> 1. I noticed  that in all 3 Scenarios, the RS message must include ISP
> name sub-option,so,is it a "MUST"  sub-optinon that be include in the
> Multi-homing Information option? if it is true,what will it happen if
> the host don't know the name of the ISP? I think in the Scenarios of
> stateless
> addres autoconfigue, it is not necessary for host to know the topology
> of the network and the name of the ISP.
> in your draft ,all hosts know clearly which ISP they belong to ,I  
> think
> we can distinguish them using some kinds of  VLAN techonoly.
>
> 2.In Scenario 3,you mention the equipment of "layer2 CPE ".so what the
> difference is that with "layer3 CPE "? In my understand ,the layer2  
> CPE
> is a layer2 equipmnet ,so in the section 3.3
>    Step (b) : Base on the information in Multi-homing Information  
> option
>               , layer 2 access node can forward this RS to the correct
>               edge router of the desired ISP without sending it to the
>               router that will not respond this RS.	
>
>  can layer2 equipment do this kind of thing?	
>
>
>
>