That's why I think it makes more sense to backport the SCTP multihoming
features to TCP so all TCP apps can use them without having to be
changed, or even better: contain the changes in a separate shim layer
so that all transport protocols can become address agile without having
to be changed.
As far as I can tell, most of the multi6 wg participants are thinking
along similar lines.
1. multi6 has not done with architectural analysis. It is still unknown
whether a multi-addressing or a id/loc split proposal(which includes
shim layer) or something else is going to be accepted.
2. If you look at the ML archive, all possible proposals are discussed
(which includes SCTP, SLAP or whatever..) So, your statement about
*most* WG participants thinking along similar lines is wrong.
3. you should speak for yourself, not for others.