On Jul 3, 2009, at 4:58 PM, Christian Vogt wrote:
On Jul 1, 2009, Joel M. Halpern wrote:
It seems to me however that it is useful to be able to explicitly
tell
which locators go with the same communicating entity, as distinct
from
the larger set of locators which might go with the same service [...]
Joel -
Yes, we absolutely need this. But why does this imply the need for a
host or stack identifier? Session identifiers already map to the
set of
locators that go to the same communicating entity. This is why we
need
to distinguish them from service identifiers, which in turn may map to
locators of different communicating entities.
the above comment seems brining more implicit assumptions regarding
"session identifiers", e.g. "Session identifiers already map to the
set of locators that go to the same communicating entity..."
as I mentioned in the prev msg, I've yet to see a simple and clear
definition of "Session" first. As Joel questioned in next msg,
I am trying to refer someone to a specific entity. They
do not have a session with that entity. So a session ID
is clearly totally useless for a referral.
Maybe I would not go as far as saying session ID is totally useless
because I do not even know what it identifies:)
Lixia
_______________________________________________
rrg mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg
