[157063] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: IPv4 address length technical design
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Owen DeLong)
Thu Oct 4 15:51:23 2012
From: Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LSU.2.00.1210041918090.12622@hermes-1.csi.cam.ac.uk>
Date: Thu, 4 Oct 2012 12:49:03 -0700
To: Tony Finch <dot@dotat.at>
Cc: NANOG <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Oct 4, 2012, at 11:19 AM, Tony Finch <dot@dotat.at> wrote:
> Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com> wrote:
>>=20
>> Once host identifiers are no longer dependent on or related to =
topology,
>> there's no reason a reasonable fixed-length cannot suffice.
>=20
> Host identities should be cryptographic hashes of public keys, so you =
have
> to support algorithm agility, which probably implies variable length.
>=20
No, they really shouldn't, but I understand why some security zealots =
think that's a good idea.
Owen
