Re: [Ideas] Diasambugating Identifier and Identity

[Alexander Clemm <[e-mail]>]

Yes, I think we agree on the notion of identifier.  

Of course, this is not just about identifier- but identity-enabled networking, so there is still that other aspect needing to be fleshed out. Re: Michael's question, authentication is one of its applications, but I think there are others, for example related to metadata (back to the earlier point of whether identity is a data record) - an example would be the "type" of endpoint which applies regardless whether one or many identifiers are being used.  Related to metadata, you could have policies that are applied based on identity (e.g. an entity with a paid contract), not based on which one of several identifiers an entity happens to use.   

-- Alex

-----Original Message-----
From: Dino Farinacci [mailto:[e-mail]] 
Sent: Wednesday, April 26, 2017 10:26 AM
To: Liubingyang (Bryan) <[e-mail]>
Cc: Michael Menth <[e-mail]>; Alexander Clemm <[e-mail]>; Robert Moskowitz <[e-mail]>; [e-mail]
Subject: Re: [Ideas] Diasambugating Identifier and Identity

> For example, (one of) the real reason we want identifiers is that we want something that does not change with topology locations to identify mobile communication end point, which functions that cannot be carried by IP addresses. Since (I believe) we all have consensus on this function, we can at least agree that identifier is topology-independent label that identifies a communication end point. 

Exactly.

So to extend the definition to be specific. The identifier is used for a host stack transport connection. Its the “thing” (the arguments) you pass to connect(), bind(), sendto(), etc, socket API calls. And what you “get back” from gethostbyname().

Dino