Re: [RAM] Re: Ramblings about "locator"

> If we consider forwarding functionality to be the definition of a  
> locator, then we are going to have a very serious issue.

The above should not be a constrain or concern because in the new architecture under
discussion all current principles may not need to apply. E.g. current address vs.
future id / loc split.

Thanks,
Peter

--- Tony Li <tli@cisco.com> wrote:

> 
> On Jun 14, 2007, at 1:30 PM, RJ Atkinson wrote:
> 
> > 	You were the person who persuaded me, after some
> > resistance on my part, that since the IEEE MAC address
> > is used in a lookup table (either a bridge table or an
> > IPv6 ND table) to forward the frame/packet, therefore
> > the MAC address must have location semantics and so
> > could not be a pure Identifier.
> 
> 
> If we consider forwarding functionality to be the definition of a  
> locator, then we are going to have a very serious issue.  Consider  
> other forwarding mechanisms that let you take into account source  
> address, port number, protocol number, DSCP, etc. as part of the  
> forwarding decision.  If we follow that logic, the phase of the moon  
> could also be a locator.  Is that what we want?
> 
> I prefer Joel's line of thinking.
> 
> Tony
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> RAM mailing list
> RAM@iab.org
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ram
> 

      ____________________________________________________________________________________
Luggage? GPS? Comic books? 
Check out fitting gifts for grads at Yahoo! Search
http://search.yahoo.com/search?fr=oni_on_mail&p=graduation+gifts&cs=bz

_______________________________________________
RAM mailing list
RAM@iab.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ram