Re: draft-ietf-multi6-multihoming-requirements-03

In fact you made me think of one possible unexpected consequence. If we allow
diffserv code points to influence multihoming policy, it would be possible for
someone who thought they were setting QOS policy to accidentally influence
multihoming policy. That's not a very welcome side effect, but it may be 
inevitable.

   Brian

Dave Wilson wrote:
> 
> > I think "class of traffic" would certainly include diffserv codepoints as well
> > as (or instead of) protocol numbers. If traffic has been classified by a diffserv
> > classifier before it hits the multihoming logic, that could imply that the source
> > and/or destination address helped to determine the diffserv codepoint and hence
> > the multihoming policy.
> 
> Ok, thanks.
> 
> > Are you suggesting any change to the text?
> 
> No. Even if the text fails to include the scenario I mentioned, I am not sure
> that it would be a problem. However I'd like to make sure that multihoming
> expectations in the policy groups match expectations here.
> 
> Regards,
> Dave
> 
> --
>  dave.wilson <at> heanet.ie  ------- DW238-RIPE ------- GPG key: davew+pgp <at> heanet.ie
>  HEAnet Limited, Brooklawn House, Crampton Ave, Ballsbridge, D4 p:353-1-6609040
>  "A reload a day keeps the TAC away" - Roger Gottsponer RIPE-40 f:353-1-6603666
>  HEAnet's National Networking Conference http://www.heanet.ie/conferences/2001/

--

-- 
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Brian E Carpenter 
Distinguished Engineer, Internet Standards & Technology, IBM 
On assignment at the IBM Zurich Laboratory, Switzerland