On Dec 5, 2012, at 12:27 AM, Christian Huitema <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Hi Scott, >> >> Doesn't that strike you as a layering violation? Shouldn't a stack shield >> applications from having to create these mechanisms? > > Not really. Applications do have their own concept of identity, for very > good reasons -- think of the difference between managing corporate data, > your personal email, and an online game. They also have their own specific > "time line" -- anywhere between instant to forever. It is quite hard to > develop a "one size fits all" solution. Otherwise, "the market" probably > would have created one. Yes, entirely reasonable. When an application is going to be mobile across stacks, then another mechanism is necessary. However, for the mobility of the stack itself, that support should be intrinsic. Should apps have to know that the infrastructure has changed and that the active interface now has a different L3 name? Tony _______________________________________________ rrg mailing list [email protected] http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg
