Re: Site local

[Kurt Erik Lindqvist <kurtis@kurtis.pp.se>]

On fredag, nov 29, 2002, at 05:38 Europe/Stockholm, Tony Li wrote:

> Hope you're feeling better.
Yupp!

> In particular, what I was suggesting was that the separation of
> locators and identifiers would greatly simplify the (perceived)
> problem that is driving site local addresses anyway.  A site would
> get global identifiers immediately and then when they connect to
> the net (or change connections), they would only change the locator
> part.
>
> By itself, that seems like a lesser win.  However, if the architecture
> is tweaked so that the site's global locators are only known to the
> site's border routers, then the only changes that need to be done
> are very trivial.
>
> In short, someone else has another motivation for the same 
> architectural
> flexibility that a group here has been asking for all along.
Ok, I am more or less with the idea of locator+identifier. What I am 
worried about is the effects of this on the applications.

My main reason for being against anything that could lead down a NAT 
road (and I am worried that any attempt besides assigning global 
addresses everywhere will lead there) is that I have seen the effects 
this has had on delaying deployment of new services and creating 
problems at end sites.

- kurtis -