1
0
mirror of https://github.com/becarpenter/book6.git synced 2024-05-07 02:54:53 +00:00

Minor additions

This commit is contained in:
Brian E Carpenter
2024-01-02 10:44:40 +13:00
committed by GitHub
parent c54e6ddbbf
commit ebfa4205f6

View File

@ -8,6 +8,10 @@ usually to provide redundancy in case of failures. The phrase
the problems in achieving MHMP using multiple address prefixes. This
section discusses practical techniques for site multihoming.
Domestic or small office installations are out of scope for this topic. They
will rarely be connected permanently to more than one ISP, and therefore cannot
expect smooth failover.
Note that the term "multihoming" is sometimes used to describe a
configuration _inside_ a site network where a node is connected to more
than one internal router to provide redundancy. That complicates site
@ -133,10 +137,16 @@ not share all the disadvantages of IPv4 NAT. As discussed in RFC 6296,
Of course, NPTv6 retains some of the disadvantages of NAT: all of the
problems that directly follow from having different IP addresses at the
two ends of a connection. Any site running NPTv6 must either deal with
these problems, or avoid any affected applications. Section 5 of
[RFC6296](https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6296) discusses this in
detail.
two ends of a connection. Section 5 of
[RFC6296](https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6296) discusses this.
Any site running NPTv6 must either deal with
these problems, or avoid any affected applications. In particular,
SIP (Session Initiation Protocol for IP telephony) will not work without
the support of a proxy mechanism
\[[RFC6314](https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6314)]
as well as provision for IPv6/IPv4 coexistence
\[[RFC6157](https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6157)].
This limits the applicability of NPTv6.
### Transport layer solutions