>> A locally administered identifier is perfectly adequate for global >> communications and other ILNP hosts can easily recognize it. > > Not without the assurance of the pursuing locator. Both the locator and the > identifier make the uniqueness.
Again, the locally administered identifier is bound to a site. Typically, a site will have a number of locators. >> The only difference is that the host cannot roam outside of its >> administrative scope. > > So "locally administered" identifier is bound to its location: subnetwork, > site. Where is the identity/location separation then? A locally administered identifier still provides seamless mobility within the site, which is not without value. Hosts wanting seamless mobility across sites will need to use a global identifier. We suspect that the vast majority of hosts to make use of a global identifier as a result, however, the local identifier is part of the architecture so that those that have strong privacy requirements can also participate. Tony _______________________________________________ rrg mailing list [email protected] http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg
