> > Second, as I said above, I am quite unsure that the old way of > > thinking of general purpose end system IDs is actually useful. We > > can have network-layer identities, or transport-layer ones, but > > what will we use them for? > > They are very useful for host mobility and multi-access. > Architecturally, their economic value derives from them allowing a > host a better capability of choice between operators in a multi- > access situation.
Hi Pekka, I have a concern about the business model of the HIP which uses HIT (flat label) as host identifier. Since the public key is self-generated by hosts and the HIT is the hash value of the public key which has no organization semantics, how can the id/loc mapping management been shared among different countries and different service providers? I don't believe it's acceptable from both political and economic aspects that all the mapping management is dominated by a single company, such as Skype. Best wishes, Xiaohu XU -- to unsubscribe send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body. archive: <http://psg.com/lists/rrg/> & ftp://psg.com/pub/lists/rrg
