On Aug 6, 2008, at 2:16 AM, Christian Vogt wrote:
...... As I mentioned during the RRG session in Dublin as well as in an earlier post [1] to this mailing list, we should re-consider whether there really is a need for another ID/locator split in addition to the existing hostname/address split. I do not believe there is.
"the mind is like parachute, it works best when it is open" -- I picked this up from a 8th grader.
it is natural that different people may see different pictures, it is also beneficial to try to see the picture from different views.
it is very true that good use of DNS names can help solve many problems, as reasoned below, however this is not equivalent to a proof of node-ID being unnecessary. HIP is used today, maybe it is beneficial to find out why people use HIP first.
We would get all the benefits we are after if we re-used the existing hostname/address split, and moved the splitting point from between the application layer and the transport layer down to between the transport layer and the IP layer. When we get to the engineering stage, we would need to work out three auxiliary methods: (1) to generate synthetic hostnames for hosts without a real hostname (2) to support legacy transport protocols (3) to communicate hostnames to correspondent hosts Synthesizing a hostname based on an address, as you are suggesting, is IMHO a very reasonable solution for (1). A simple and secure solution for (2) would be to hash an arbitrary- length hostname into 128 bits and use this in legacy transport protocols -- just like HIP is generating 128-bit HITs from arbitrary-length keys. A cool solution for (3) could be the combination of (i) an initial explicit exchange of hostnames between peers, and (ii) Noel's proposal to compute checksums based on identifiers (hostnames, in this case) for subsequent packets. - Christian [1] http://www.ops.ietf.org/lists/rrg/2008/msg01912.html -- to unsubscribe send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body. archive: <http://psg.com/lists/rrg/> & ftp://psg.com/pub/lists/rrg
-- to unsubscribe send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body. archive: <http://psg.com/lists/rrg/> & ftp://psg.com/pub/lists/rrg
