Joel M. Halpern allegedly wrote on 12/03/2009 11:57 AM:
> No, routing and addressing do not, in and of themselves, require an
> identifier in every packet. I had not understood your question as
> being focussed on the "in every packet" question. I was trying to get
> at the quesiton of whether the routing and network system should have
> an identifier. I think it should. As far as I can tell, multiple
> aspects of the system would be cleaner and easier to work with if
> such an identifier exists (see below for what I would identify.)
Yes but if your favorite identifier is a stack name ("logical stack
construct"), how can it be handled by the network layer -- except as an
opaque bucket? The state the identifier is associated with is only in
and used by the communication endpoints. When you say the network
layer, are you including DNS lookups in that?
> (I am not sure
> how to handle things like UDP without putting the identifier in every
> packet.)
UDP isn't much of a transport protocol, so usually things related to
additional endpoint state are handled above it.
> As for what I want to identify, I tend to think that the identifier
> should correspond not to the physical node, but to the logical stack
> construct. A logical set of protocol machinery, stacked from the
> network layer up. A physical machine may have multiple of these.
> And in some cases, a single one of these may be operating across
> physical boundaries, if the coupling works right.
Right :-). As we've said before, I have no problem with the concept,
just doubting whether we need a new namespace. And ...
> While I have
> considered writing up a document on just this, I didn't bother
> because it does not seem it would provide any actual value to the
> research group in reaching a conclusion on what to recommend.
... that might complement the point I was trying to make before, that
routing and addressing don't care how identifiers are used.
Thanks ... Scott
_______________________________________________
rrg mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg
