On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 6:30 AM, Dae Young KIM <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 5:29 AM, William Herrin <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>
>> > Do you think routing and addressing requires a session ID in every
>> > packet?  If not, let the upper layers find their own solutions -- e2e
>> > argument and all that.
>>
>> Hi Scott,
>>
>> Yes, I do think every packet needs a session ID, for much the same
>> reason that every packet has to have an IP address even if it's only
>> to a host on the local LAN that you could reach with only it's MAC
>> address. Any time the transport protocol relies on the IP address for
>> non-routing functions, it places a constraint on the structure of
>> routing system that isn't otherwise there.
>>
>
> What every packet has to carry is the node address(IP address), but not the
> session ID. Session ID is a property of the layer up. In the current
> Internet model, socket could be considered as session ID, which, however,
> need not be visible in the packet header where the main job is routing.
>
> (Somebody told that socket is not enough to distinguish a session. Perhaps,
> he is right. I have thought about this too deep.)
>

Perhaps, I should have said 'port-id' instead of 'socket.'

-- 
Regards,

DY
http://cnu.kr/~dykim
_______________________________________________
rrg mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg

Reply via email to