RE: Architectural approaches to multi6

["Bound, Jim" <Jim.Bound@hp.com>]

> > No one uses FQDN's above IP till one gets to the Application layer.
> > Why
> > do you say this?
> 
> I don't think I was saying that people are doing this today.

Hmmm thought you did.  I misunderstood then.  My apologies then.

> 
> > Also we need a solution that does not assume this at all.
> 
> Why not?

WHen I say assume let me clarify.  By "assume" I mean, solution we end
up with won't work if all *sockaddr_DL references to Network Byte Order
addresses MUST become references to *char_foo_identifier strings.  I
will assume you know the ramfications to the stack above IP "virtual"
layer in the IP stack and then to what we often call "user" space where
the applications reside.  That is a non-starter.


> 
> > Doing this would at best be nice to have long term. THere is also no
> > way to enforce it.
> 
> So there we have our long term goal. If we can get there by using 16 
> byte values that look enough like IPv6 addresses to fool existing 
> implementations for a while but label them "identifier - not 
> to be used 
> in routing" I don't have a problem with that.

Yep that is what I was thinking architecturally.  But have not gone down
the affect to code yet.

That being said I believe Christian's point was quite valid.

Regards,
/jim
> 
>