> This should not be surprising. Given that the applications community
> blindly assumes there is a single addressing scope, when they bump
into
> the reality of the deployed network there will be problems.
Proclaiming
> that scopes are bad for applications does not make the filtering that
> causes scopes go away.

Bad, bad application developers. We should really punish them! :-)

Seriously, application developers face some very real problems. The
issues are uniqueness in space and uniqueness in time. 

The space dimension is experienced when a host is connected to several
sites, e.g. home network and VPN. If the application receives a site
local address from a local name service or a local discovery service, it
must associate that address with a site identifier. The first stumbling
block is that most applications don't have this concept, they just copy
the address. 

The second stumbling block is that there are no readily available site
identifiers -- you would need to manage a unique name space, which is
precisely what you don't get from FFC0::/10. In the absence of site
identifier, the routing of connections to the proper site is haphazard.
The application is supposed to remember that the site local address was
learned through a specific site, i.e. only use in site X the site local
addresses learned from site X's DNS service. This become quickly very
hairy, as the DNS does not in fact have a concept of site.

Restricting hosts to handle exactly one site removes some of the
problem. But you then bump into the time dimension. Hosts may become
members of different sites at different times, e.g. a laptop moving from
the office to the airport or to the home. Addresses learned in one site
should not be used in the next, but for that you must have an easy way
to tell that you have changed sites. Without a site identifier, that can
be real hard.

Tony, these problems are not theoretical. They come very much on top of
the issues encountered by developers porting applications to IPv6.

Using unambiguous addresses solves a lot of the problems: a multi homed
site can route connections to the proper site, source address selection
can work, and moves to another site can be detected. There are remaining
issues, notably dealing with intermittent connectivity, but these issues
are inherent to any mobility scenario.

By the way, link local addresses tend to suffer from much of the same
issue. However, it is easier for applications to deal with LL addresses,
as there is a clear linkage between addresses and discovery protocols
operating in a single link.

-- Christian Huitema


--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List
IPng Home Page:                      http://playground.sun.com/ipng
FTP archive:                      ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng
Direct all administrative requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply via email to