RE: network controls are necessary

["Tony Li" <Tony.Li@procket.com>]

|   Some applications need to see more than just the host name. 
|   If we are
|   going to build something where a host can have several 
|   addresses tied to
|   several paths with different properties (fast/slow, secure/insecure,
|   free/cheap/expensive), applications will want to make selecting
|   addresses their business.


Yes, but should the application have the details about the locators?  Or
should it specify its properties and then let underlying systems choose?

For the sake of a loosely coupled system, I'd say that the applications
shouldn't ever worry about locators.  And this is regardless of whether
the host is implementing the policies or the SBR.


|   Currently, IPv6 doesn't support backwards compatibility with
|   applications that use the traditional socket API. The past 
|   three days
|   I've been trying to find a web browser with IPv6 support for my new
|   iBook, so I think I've earned the right to say there aren't 
|   enough IPv6
|   applications yet that breaking those is a big issue. 
|   However, if we go
|   down the path of requiring applications to change, we 
|   should make very,
|   very, very sure this is a one time thing and we build in 
|   everything we
|   need for IPv6 - IPv15.


How big will identifiers be in IPv9 and do you want to hard code that
into your application?  Ans: make it opaque.  The application asks for
a connection to a hostname only.

Tony