RFC 8678: Enterprise Multihoming using Provider-Assigned IPv6 Addresses without Network Prefix Translation: Requirements and Solutions
In plain English — editorial summary, not part of the RFC
Connecting an enterprise site to multiple ISPs over IPv6 using provider-assigned addresses is difficult without the use of some form of Network Address Translation (NAT). Much has been written on this topic over the last 10 to 15 years, but it still remains a problem without a clearly defined or widely implemented solution. Any multihoming solution without NAT requires hosts at the site to have addresses from each ISP and to select the egress ISP by selecting a source address for outgoing packets. It also requires routers at the site to take into account those source addresses when forwarding packets out towards the ISPs. This document examines currently available mechanisms for providing a solution to this problem for a broad range of enterprise topologies. It covers the behavior of routers to forward traffic by taking into account source address, and it covers the behavior of hosts to select appropriate default source addresses. It also covers any possible role that routers might play in providing information to hosts to help them select appropriate source addresses. In the process of exploring potential solutions, this document also makes explicit requirements for how the solution would be expected to behave from the perspective of an enterprise site network administrator.
Document record
- Document ID
- RFC8678
- Published
- December 2019
- Authors
- F. Baker; C. Bowers; J. Linkova
- Status
- INFORMATIONAL
- Stream
- IETF
- Area
- rtg
- Pages
- 43
- Also known as
- —
Related documents
Ranked automatically by shared keywords, IETF area and stream — not by editorial selection.
- RFC 8679MPLS Egress Protection FrameworkCurrent
December 2019
- RFC 8685Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) Extensions for the Hierarchical Path Computation Element (H-PCE) ArchitectureUpdated
December 2019
- RFC 8670BGP Prefix Segment in Large-Scale Data CentersCurrent
December 2019
- RFC 8687OSPF Routing with Cross-Address Family Traffic Engineering TunnelsCurrent
November 2019
- RFC 8669Segment Routing Prefix Segment Identifier Extensions for BGPCurrent
December 2019
- RFC 8668Advertising Layer 2 Bundle Member Link Attributes in IS-ISCurrent
December 2019
- RFC 8667IS-IS Extensions for Segment RoutingCurrent
December 2019
- RFC 8666OSPFv3 Extensions for Segment RoutingCurrent
December 2019
Also filed under
About this page
The document record above — title, authors, date, status, stream, area, relationships, DOI and errata — is imported verbatim from the public RFC Editor index. The “in plain English” section is editorial: written by The metasystema editorial team, not part of the RFC. Where the two differ, the RFC text governs.
Last checked against the RFC Editor index on . RFCs are never revised after publication; changes are issued as new documents.
Data sources · Editorial policy · Report a correction · What is an RFC?