Re: [Spud] New Version Notification for draft-hildebrand-spud-prototype-02.txt

[Patrick McManus <[e-mail]>]

On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 9:47 AM, Brian Trammell <[e-mail]> wrote:

>
> Perhaps we can apply the question that led to the separation of TCP and IP
> in the first place: does the path need to see it / can the path do
> something universally useful with it? Put it in SPUD. Is it end-to-end?
> Stick it above SPUD, encrypt it, and hide the key from the path.
>
>
I like that as a guiding principle


> Put that way, session IDs binding flows together seem to me to be an
> end-to-end thing. But of course different situations might have different
> requirements.
>
>
I feel like the sticky part here is that middle boxes on the paths are
playing a role here where the information can be useful.. in particular
without this information they aren't able to route e2e based on just 5
tuple because of the nat/firewall translations they do.