Re: [tae] The internet architecture
Bryan Ford <brynosaurus@gmail.com> Wed, 03 December 2008 18:45 UTC
Return-Path: <tae-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: tae-archive@ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-tae-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C01553A6971;
Wed, 3 Dec 2008 10:45:27 -0800 (PST)
X-Original-To: tae@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tae@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 135193A67EC
for <tae@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 3 Dec 2008 10:29:46 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5
tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32])
by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
with ESMTP id Aa9ghqxW9r6H for <tae@core3.amsl.com>;
Wed, 3 Dec 2008 10:29:45 -0800 (PST)
Received: from gv-out-0910.google.com (gv-out-0910.google.com [216.239.58.187])
by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 99DE03A68AB
for <tae@ietf.org>; Wed, 3 Dec 2008 10:29:44 -0800 (PST)
Received: by gv-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id e6so846121gvc.15
for <tae@ietf.org>; Wed, 03 Dec 2008 10:29:39 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:to:content-type
:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:subject:date:cc:x-mailer
:from; bh=sET04gLyEuTe0fHdc9W6kg30IGLFvMiBsmEs2gHlQt0=;
b=l/WTCWPhNMxCouCcgzXXQGXIHnVEVE0P9d1RyU8boh7TsFmlm/YeBMUgXwujbWxu1k
SVeGeq0m5W099Vp1wGDC1vc5yQDtW6MeHpa5k4wzfxpgphAO3E4GPx76CNqVun4UGLsN
jkE5r4Qjy5KFCfDuPWIXWJtJqF5vIcEm1hSqo=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
h=message-id:to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version
:subject:date:cc:x-mailer:from;
b=YwZch0VQ95yXlbp6sODXV0akfl83r5zKemEuP6XJ/re1dJKHZ1/YbkeAFKELS6zjQ1
uMHYGjisZffPP4mYMLW5gpoGmSAWVP4jHV7DwhOHRtnP992M4tjLnac2JAW5eHgvv8RC
APDLWFYH5+n3KvH2UXQwgzRG4EB1VAUU9GKb8=
Received: by 10.103.193.12 with SMTP id v12mr6315267mup.23.1228328979672;
Wed, 03 Dec 2008 10:29:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: from guest-23.mpi-sb.mpg.de (guest-23.mpi-sb.mpg.de [139.19.64.23])
by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id
t10sm9887811muh.21.2008.12.03.10.29.38
(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5);
Wed, 03 Dec 2008 10:29:38 -0800 (PST)
Message-Id: <C15AE32B-E564-4C93-86FF-40EF203E673A@mpi-sws.org>
To: ietf@ietf.org
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v929.2)
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2008 19:29:37 +0100
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.929.2)
From: Bryan Ford <brynosaurus@gmail.com>
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 03 Dec 2008 10:45:27 -0800
Cc: tae@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [tae] The internet architecture
X-BeenThere: tae@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Transport Architecture Evolution <tae.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tae>,
<mailto:tae-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/pipermail/tae>
List-Post: <mailto:tae@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tae-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tae>,
<mailto:tae-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed"; DelSp="yes"
Sender: tae-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: tae-bounces@ietf.org
I know this follow-up is a bit late, but on the topic of transitioning upper-layer protocols such as transports and applications toward being "IP address oblivious" - either by using DNS names instead, or location-independent crytpographic identifiers as in HIP, or personal names as in UIA, or something else - I just wanted to suggest that the new "Transport Architecture Evolution" (tae@ietf.org)) mailing list that I set up just after the IETF meeting might be a good place to discuss such architectural issues, especially in terms of the way they affect application<->transport and transport<->network layer interfaces. To throw in my quick $.02 (and perhaps invite more discussion :) ), I think we absolutely need to migrate both networking APIs and transport layer protocols themselves toward a model where an "endpoint" is an opaque (to the transport/application) variable-length string of some kind, and the transport/application shouldn't even care much if any what exactly the string is. The string could potentially be a DNS name, a dotted IPv4 address, a colonificated IPv6 address, a hex- encoded HIP cryptographic host identifier, a UIA personal name, ... And sure, the semantics of these different kinds of "endpoint strings" will vary depending on what they actually are, and for network management purposes they won't all be equivalent or interchangeable, but for purposes of normal transport and application protocol operation - i.e., "gimme a TCP-like connection to the endpoint named 'X'", why should transports and applications need to care? Just think how much easier the IPv4 to IPv6 transition would have been if nothing above the IP layer cared exactly what an IP address looks like or how big it is. Cheers, Bryan _______________________________________________ tae mailing list tae@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tae
- Re: [tae] The internet architecture Bryan Ford
- Re: [tae] The internet architecture Keith Moore
- Re: [tae] The internet architecture Hallam-Baker, Phillip
- Re: [tae] The internet architecture Keith Moore
- Re: [tae] The internet architecture Hallam-Baker, Phillip
- Re: [tae] The internet architecture Keith Moore
- Re: [tae] The internet architecture John Leslie
- Re: [tae] The internet architecture Joe Touch
- Re: [tae] The internet architecture Keith Moore
- Re: [tae] The internet architecture Thomas Narten
- Re: [tae] The internet architecture Thomas Narten
- Re: [tae] The internet architecture Henning Schulzrinne
- Re: [tae] The internet architecture Dave CROCKER
- Re: [tae] The internet architecture Melinda Shore
- [tae] sockets vs. fds Dave CROCKER
- Re: [tae] The internet architecture John Day
- Re: [tae] sockets vs. fds Melinda Shore
- Re: [tae] The internet architecture John Day
- Re: [tae] The internet architecture John Day
- Re: [tae] The internet architecture Keith Moore
- Re: [tae] The internet architecture Keith Moore
- Re: [tae] The internet architecture Keith Moore
- Re: [tae] The internet architecture Keith Moore
- Re: [tae] The internet architecture Dave CROCKER
- Re: [tae] The internet architecture John Day
- Re: [tae] The internet architecture John Day
- Re: [tae] The internet architecture Thomas Narten
- Re: [tae] The internet architecture Keith Moore
- Re: [tae] The internet architecture Thomas Narten
- Re: [tae] The internet architecture Keith Moore
- Re: [tae] sockets vs. fds Tony Finch
- Re: [tae] The internet architecture David W. Hankins
- Re: [tae] The internet architecture Hallam-Baker, Phillip
- Re: [tae] sockets vs. fds Florian Weimer
- [tae] The Great Naming Debate (was Re: The intern… Bryan Ford
- Re: [tae] The Great Naming Debate (was Re: The in… Keith Moore
- Re: [tae] The Great Naming Debate (was Re: The in… Joe Baptista
- Re: [tae] The Great Naming Debate (was Re: The in… Hallam-Baker, Phillip
- Re: [tae] The Great Naming Debate (was Re: The in… Melinda Shore
- Re: [tae] The Great Naming Debate (was Re: The in… Hallam-Baker, Phillip
- Re: [tae] The Great Naming Debate (was Re: The in… Keith Moore
- Re: [tae] The internet architecture John Leslie