Hi Scott,
|> 3.1. A Mechanism Taxonomy
|>
|> In this taxonomy, solutions are grouped by the primary mechanisms
|> that they use to achieve their goals.
|
|I'm wondering, in the categories {transport, translation,
|encapsulation}, where would you put shim6? It's below transport.
|Would you say rewriting is translation? Would you say an addition of
|a header is an encapsulation?
As I've said in prior email, I'm less interested in refining this taxonomy.
I agree that there's arguments to put Shim6 in either translation or in map
& encap. This doesn't seem like a productive argument.
|> 3.1.2. Translation
|>
|> Translation solutions are characterized by a translation
|> operation between an identifier to a locator and back to an
|> identifier as the packet traverses the network.
|
|Now that I've pondered this a little, I can't think of any approach
|that does that (translate from identifier to locator and back again).
NAT, for example.
|Also except
|for GSE and ILNP, the local "thing" is not an "identifier" in the
|sense that the term is used here, a topology-independent name of a
|single endpoint, or node ID. It is a locator with limited scope.
This is a terminology nit. We've defined "identifier" to have zero
topological significance. However, that's just taking a black-and-white
view of the world. It's not unreasonable to have a name that has both
identification semantics and local locator scope.
|> 3.3.1. Strategy A
|>
|> Local routing is based on an address, which functions as a GUID,
|> SID component and local locator,
|
|Should this be an "and/or" or "or" instead of an "and"? Or is this
|supposed to be an in-line definition of "address"? A local locator is
|not necessarily also part of a session ID.
Yes, I think that this is an inline (and local) definition of address.
Obviously, that's not a requirement, just the local definition.
|> 3.3.2.2. Identifier variants
|>
|> B2a Each host has a single numeric identifer to which the
|> locators are attached. This identifier is used by the
|> layer-4/5 and higher protocols to compose the SID.
|>
|> B2b Each service provided by a host has a globally unique,
|> hierarchical character-string identifier to which the
|> locators are attached. Clients initiating communication
|> with that service negotiate a numeric SID which is unique
|> only within the scope of that service.
|
|In this section I don't see the relevance of "numeric" and
|"character-string". To the functions using these identifiers, they
|are just bits, regardless of what semantics a human might see in them.
Agreed, this is diverging from the conceptual and into the engineering.
References removed here, as well as others that I could trivially find.
Thanks,
Tony
_______________________________________________
rrg mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg
