On Wednesday 16 June 2010 at 20:41:10 Ran Atkinson sent: > Earlier, Toni Stoev wrote: > > 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. > > I think we disagree. > > Even with local-scope Identifier values, the Identifier > does not name a location && the Locator does not identify > a node. So the concepts of identity and location are > crisply separated, with clear semantics for each.
Does a locally unique identifier provide unique identity outside of its subnetwork? _______________________________________________ rrg mailing list [email protected] http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg
