> Not necessarily. The <anycast,unicast> binding could be stored in the > binding cache as in MIPv6 and TCP could continue using the anycast > address.
Depends what happens when the binding times out and needs to be refreshed/re-established. MIPv6 assumes that it can just redo the RR exchange and still end up sending to the same host. That isn't the case for anycast since the anycast address identifies more of a service than a host. Thus to make it more likely that the transport connection survive routing changes it makes sense to get the transport connection basically be redirected to use a unicast member of the anycast group. Erik -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List IPng Home Page: http://playground.sun.com/ipng FTP archive: ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng Direct all administrative requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------
