Fred, That's my mental model, except that I think of the locators as LOC0, LOC1, etc to allow for the inevitable hierarchy. I had also assumed there would need to be a hierarchy of maps, with HIT<->LOC0 as the lowest level map, but Scott Brim obviously has another model in mind (I need to think a bit more before replying to Scott).
Brian On 2009-01-08 11:49, Templin, Fred L wrote: > Regarding HIP + map/encaps, maybe it is obvious to everyone > else already but I think what that gives you is an endpoint > identity (the HIT), an inner routing locator (iRLOC), and an > outer RLOC (oRLOC). Up to now, LISP (and perhaps others) have > been using the term "EID" to refer to what I mean by "iRLOC", > and the term "RLOC" to refer to what I mean by "oRLOC". > > In this sense, "oRLOC" is routable within the scope of an > interdomain region, while "iRLOC" is routable only within and > end site (or edge network, or whatever you want to call it). > The HIP HIT is not routable within any scope so it is purely > an identifier and not a locator. > > Is this news to anyone, or already so obvious that it doesn't > even bear mention? (Will check back later; I really need to > be off doing other things...) > > Fred > [email protected] > _______________________________________________ > rrg mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg > _______________________________________________ rrg mailing list [email protected] https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg
