... > Let's inventory what we need identifiers for: > > 1. demultiplexing > 2. access control > 3. error detection > 4. referrals
What about session labels, e.g. for security associations? That is more than demultiplexing. What about multipath management? Again, that seems more than just demultiplexing. > > And what we need locators for: > > 5. forwarding packets > 6. sending back control messages > > Note that all of these uses of identifiers can be limited to the > application or session layers so there is no need for identifiers to > appear in any layer 3 or 4 headers - True, but they will "appear" invisibly in transport and cryptographic checksums. Decoupling these from locator-addresses seems to be a feature (among other things, it makes NAT transparent to checksums). > if we don't mind changing > applications and APIs to map application layer identifiers to transport > and lower layer locators. > > But changing applications is a non-starter, because the number of > applications is so huge and application writers simply lack the > knowledge to interact with the network properly. After 10 years there > are still applications that don't know how to work over IPv6, for instance. > > Now NOT changing applications means that the identifiers must look a lot > like regular IP addresses. More precisely, it means we can't change the socket API, so I think a shim in the socket layer may be the way to go. Brian > With shim6, we avoided a mapping system at > significant cost: we need assistence from applications when the > initially chosen identifier is not currently a reachable locator. Also, > shim6 feedback indicates that a pure host solution is not what most > people want, and requiring changes on both ends is a big deployment > barrier. > > If we want to do all of this in middleboxes we pretty much end up in > LISP territory. The data plane issues with that are fairly well > understood by now, but this requires a identifier-to-locator mapping > service, which is not that well understood currently. > > Do we have consensus yet on what would be the best place to solve the > problem? > > -- > 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 > -- 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
