Lixia Zhang allegedly wrote on 07/15/2009 1:52 PM: >> 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..."
This mapping of session identifier -> locators is transient and not for general use. That is, you couldn't put a session identifier in DNS and expect to use it as a "where is this node" locator. However, while a session exists, participants in that session can use a session identifier internally. > 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, See previous reply. > 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. That's a different purpose and the statement is correct. A session ID is meaningless if there is no session. _______________________________________________ rrg mailing list [email protected] http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg
