Re: WG Review: Multiple InterFaces (mif)

On 2009-4-21, at 9:00, Sam Hartman wrote:
> Keith, I've considered your points and continue to disagree.  I'm
> mostly replying in the interest of judging consensus.
>
> I believe that the primary use cases identified in the MIF BOF are use
> cases that are not going to go away.  I think that saying "avoid
> multiple addresses" is likely to be the same kind of head-in-sand
> thinking that caused us to get where we are today with a number of
> areas where there is a disconnect between what the market wants and
> what we're willing to include in our engineering model.
Agree with Sam. If you want a host to have a more reliable  
connectivity to the network than any one of its interfaces can give  
it, or if you want to aggregate capacity of multiple network  
connections, you have no choice but to assign it multiple interfaces  
in today's Internet. Nokia alone has probably shipped over a billion  
devices by now that have at least WLAN + 3G, and there are obviously  
many other vendors. Any IETF activity that enables better use of those  
interfaces simultaneously is consequently very interesting.
Lars

smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf