Pekka Nikander wrote:


My current view is that we will be progressing along two (or perhaps three) parallel paths, the steps being roughly as follows:

1a. Implement SHIM6
   - changes stack
   - does not change applications
   - implements identifier / locator split, but
     - keeps identifier and locator semantics and syntax identical
   - does not require any additional infrastructure
   - works only with IPv6

1b. Implement "invisible" HIP that uses IP addresses as identifiers
   - changes stack
   - does not change applications
   - implements identifier / locator split, but
     - keeps identifier and locator semantics and syntax identical
   - does not require any additional infrastructure
   - works with both IPv4 and IPv6
   - is more heavyweight than SHIM6

2a. Implement KHIs on the top of SHIM6
   - changes stack but minimally from 1a, perhaps not at all
   - does not change applications

I don't understand the last point. A KHI couldn't be used in referrals unless we have a ubiquitous and scalable KHI->locator lookup system, and I don't think we know how to build such a thing (yet).

   - continues identifier / locator split by
   - requires additional infrastructure to KHI->locator mapping
   - works only with IPv6

2b. Implement HIP with KHIs in the legacy API
   - does not change stack from 1b
   - does not change applications
   - continues identifier / locator split by
- making a minimal difference in identifier and locator syntax and semantics
   - requires additional infrastructure to KHI->locator mapping
   - works with both IPv4 and IPv6
   - is more heavyweight than SHIM6

I think there is also a 2c to explore, which hasn't been talked about much.
Instead of doing KHI, define Hierarchically allocated 128-bit identifiers (hereby named HAI). If we have those we can use existing scalable infrastructure for lookups (defining some new DNS RR, or perhaps just use PTR and AAAA). This would still be more heavyweight than SHIM6, since the lookup of the locators is needed before communication can start.
But it would run on top shim6 for the locator agility part.

   Erik


--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
ipv6@ietf.org
Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply via email to