On Thu, Aug 17, 2000 at 09:40:18PM +0700, Oskar Sandberg wrote:
> There is also the very real issue that ISPs will very probably start
> shifting ip addresses more often even when it is technically unnecessary,
> so as to avoid services like Freenet should we be successful.
> 
> It is a real shame for the Internet in general that it is developing in
> the direction where even users who could be are not granted a permanent
> point of presence. Another one in the long list of dooming factors for the
> Internet - when we are done with Freenet it will be about time to start
> working on a full replacement.
> 

Eventually, a permanent point of presence will not be defined by an
IP address for anyone. It isn't just that providers are trying to keep
users from having servers, although there is a lot of that going on.

The concepts of 'routing address' vs. 'interface identifier' are being
gradually split, and the IP address has traditionally covered both.

Eventually, IP addresses will just identify a point in the network
topology, and say nothing about what is at that point.

>From the hosts perspective, this means that as the network topology
changes, either because of a change in providers, or a change in the
providers provider, its address will change. This also enables more
robust multihoming, with multiple addresses and multiple providers
for a host interface.

IP addresses will change on a regular basis, and won't be usefull
as identifiers.

Hosts, services, routers, etc. are expected to be 'named' (identified)
by another service, one that has more permanency. Currently that
service is DNS (yuck). That is becomming the DNS' most important
technical role, mapping an unchanging identifier to a changing locator.

Unfortunately, the DNS has also become political mess because of the
semantic content of the names. There is a growing movement to address
this by making DNS names semantically meaningless, something like
aQ345.#%^ . This is also being pushed along by internationalization,
ASCII just isn't suitable for making locally meaningfull names for
most of the world. Meaningfull names will have to come from yet
another service.

My preference would be to create an identifier that is suited to
the needs of Freenet, and just use the Internet to get from hither
to yon, without relying on it to tell us anything about who or what
is *at* hither or yon.


David Schutt


_______________________________________________
Freenet-dev mailing list
Freenet-dev at lists.sourceforge.net
http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/freenet-dev

Reply via email to