Excerpts from Xu Xiaohu on Mon, Jan 12, 2009 12:20:57PM +0800: > > > > What HIP gives you is an identifier that may be used for many > > > things. An HI can be, but does not have to be, part of the > > > process of initially finding a locator for an endpoint. For > > > example, I can go straight from domain name to locator (which > > > actually might be an agent / proxy / rendezvous point), and then > > > validate identities via some other means. > > > > Assuming I deem the DNS trustworthy, it seems much more natural to > > treat the DNS as the source of an HI, and then for the locator to > > be looked up as a function of the HI. I'm not saying your model > > doesn't work, but surely the HI is fundamental and has universal > > validity, and the locator (any of the locators) is transient and > > has non-universal scope? So starting with a locator lookup seems > > funny. > > I prefer Brain's opinion since there is no need for each host owns a > FQDN name. Once you tell me your host ID, I can resolve your locator > from a seperate ID/locator mapping system and then communicate with > you.
This is an interesting point. Thank you. _______________________________________________ rrg mailing list [email protected] http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg
