[85788] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: And Now for Something Completely Different (was Re: IPv6 news)
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Tony Li)
Mon Oct 17 12:50:24 2005
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.63.0510171234150.3396@sheen.jakma.org>
Cc: Joe Maimon <jmaimon@ttec.com>,
David Conrad <drc@virtualized.org>, Paul Vixie <vixie@vix.com>,
nanog@merit.edu
From: Tony Li <tony.li@tony.li>
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 09:46:51 -0700
To: Paul Jakma <paul@clubi.ie>
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
Paul,
>> This is completely orthogonal to a real identifier/locator split,
>> which would divide what we know of as the 'address' into two
>> separate spaces, one which says "where" the node is,
>> topologically, and one which says "who" the node is.
>
> Hmm, no idea whether it's a good idea or not, but from POV of
> scaling while it might make 'where' scaleable, you still have to
> find a way to tie "who" to "where".
True. Even better, you get to change this binding (mobility) or have
multiple bindings (multihoming).
> Some might say we already have this split though, DNS.
True enough, but unfortunately, it's not done in a way that we can
make use of the identifier in the routing subsystem or in the
transport protocols.
Tony
