[RAM] Re: revised draft proposed definitions

On Tue, Jun 12, 2007 at 08:59:10AM -0400,
 Scott W Brim <swb@employees.org> wrote 
 a message of 31 lines which said:

> > I was not able to find an example of a global locator, in the
> > current IETF standards. Does anyone have an existing example?
> 
> If your objection is because of NAT, 

No, it is independant of NAT. I said that, currently, it seems that
global "pure" locators (those that are never used for identification)
do not exist in the IETF world. (And, even outside of the IETF realm,
I have trouble naming even one. Street addresses? Longitude/latitude
coordinates for your favorite ICBM?)

> > A MPLS label is a scoped locator. Am I right?
> 
> Connection-oriented packet switching is a very different sort of
> beast.  I think we should restrict this discussion to
> connectionless.

You define MPLS as connection-oriented? This surprises me.

> >> Identifier/Locator split:	A class of network protocol that
> >> 		has no addresses, and only has (pure) identifiers
> >> 		and (pure) locators.  Proposals in the GSE/8+8
> >> 		class of solution might be examples of this,
> >> 		depending on the details of the proposal.
> > 
> > HIP too, no?
> 
> Yes, HITs are identifiers (not identities :-p)

The question is not about HITs but about HIP (the protocol). Under the
above definition, is HIP a good example of a "Identifier/Locator
split"? (I would say yes.)

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