Actually, I do not think that most folks using the terms are using ID
for "host attachment point."
I believe the primary semantic for ID that most people are using is
"Identifier for communication point with the property that the
identifier does not change if the topological placement of the
communicating entity changes."
There is outstanding discussion as to whether this identifier is, or
must be, or may be, the network attachment point, the network stack, the
transport stack, or the application.
I tend to be in the family that wants to name the network/transport
stack. I tend to treat the cases whee the network attachment point
needs to be named (for example, for monitoring purposes) as a special
case which can be treated as a stack associated with that entity.
But I will readily agree that this is not settled.
Yours,
Joel
Christopher Morrow wrote:
On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 3:54 PM, Dae Young KIM <[email protected]> wrote:
On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 4:54 AM, Lloyd Wood <[email protected]> wrote:
On 18 Nov 2009, at 17:57, Dae Young KIM wrote:
Actually, I'm new to this group, so don't have the collected knowledge
of
past conversations. My sincere apology.
The mailing list archive's at:
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/rrg/current/maillist.html
2008 and before are at:
http://www.ops.ietf.org/lists/rrg/
Thank you.
L.
DTN work: http://info.ee.surrey.ac.uk/Personal/L.Wood/saratoga/
<http://info.ee.surrey.ac.uk/Personal/L.Wood/><[email protected]>
Yet, I think I can still defend my definition of the term.
but redefining doesn't help the conversation that's been ongoing here
for .... 3+ yrs.
ID == host attachment point
Locator == network (or loosely ASN in today's bgp4 routed world)
-chris
--
Regards,
DY
http://cnu.kr/~dykim
_______________________________________________
rrg mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg
_______________________________________________
rrg mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg
