Hi Damian,
----- "Identifiers are unique within the context of a given Locator; in many cases, Identifiers might happen to be globally unique, but that is not a functional requirement for this proposal." I don't understand how this works. If you can have duplicated IDs then what happens if you have a conflict? (i.e. You move to another network where the ID is in use by another host?). As IDs are also used to identify sessions I also imagine trouble there. ----- Presumably if you move to another network, you'll need to get another identifier. One could imagine that this could be based on DHCP, or by manual configuration. Note that if a network uses particular ID allocation policies (e.g., your MAC address is your identifier), this is very unlikely. "There are no standardised mechanisms to update most transport protocols with new IP addresses in use for the session. [NB: There is IETF work in progress to add this capability into the Stream Control Transport Protocol (SCTP).]" Isn't this RFC5061 and therefore a standard more than a work in progress? 5061 appears to be a proposed standard at this point. ----- Is this proposal suggesting that DNS should be responsible for finding the hosts locators? Is a DNS update fast enough for that to work (i.e. with mobility) or cached entries make it too slow? DNS is only responsible for the mapping function from FQDN to a set of locators. In previous discussions, I believe that we came to the consensus that RRG is not trying to solve the full-blown mobility problem. The rate of dynamism is higher than what we'd really like to support in any mapping function. Tony
_______________________________________________ rrg mailing list [email protected] https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg
