On Tuesday 15 June 2010 at 20:15:01 RJ Atkinson sent:
> Earlier, Toni Stoev wrote:
> > ILNP obviously has unresloved issues.
> 
> Please describe the issues, either technical issues 
> or documentation issues, precisely.  Vague assertions
> like "obviously has unresolved issues" are not helpful.

Issue #1, documentation: Name for the location of a node

ILNP Concept of Operations says:
   The crux of this proposal is to have different names for the
   identity of a node and the location of a node, with crisp
   semantics for each.

On Saturday 12 June 2010 at 10:34:52 Tony Li sent:
> There is no name for the location of a node in ILNP.  There is no need
> for one as long as there is some subnetwork point of attachment
> resolution (i.e., ND, ARP) based on the L3 locator and identifier.

The statement of having different node identity/location names is misleading.

Issue #2, technical: Identity/location separation with locally unique 
identifiers

On Sunday 13 June 2010 at 00:30:00 Tony Li sent:
> > What happens when a node with a locally
> > unique identifier in a subnetwork moves to another subnetwork
> > where there is another node with exactly the same (locally
> > unique) identifier? How are the two nodes distinguished, and how
> > are their ongoing sessions preserved?
> 
> You are correct, locally unique identifiers will have mobility issues and
> hosts should not use their locally unique identifier outside if its scope.

There is no identity/location separation with locally unique identifiers.

Issue #3, technical documentation: "Subnetwork" term

ILNP Concept of Operations says:
   In essence, the Locator names a subnetwork.

On Saturday 12 June 2010 at 10:34:52 Tony Li sent:
> A subnetwork is a lower layer interconnect (think cloud) where a set of
> nodes is attached to the cloud, and reachability between nodes does
> not require traversing another L3 node.

There is no definition of "subnetwork" in ILNP.
"Interconnect" and "cloud" need definition too.
_______________________________________________
rrg mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg

Reply via email to