RE: GSE IDs [Re: IETF multihoming powder: just add IPv6 and stir]

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

Agreed. In the meeting I was in Mike called it 8+8 to but your note is
accurate.
Thanks
/jim

 


> -----Original Message-----
> From: J. Noel Chiappa [mailto:jnc@ginger.lcs.mit.edu] 
> Sent: Thursday, May 08, 2003 1:01 PM
> To: multi6@ops.ietf.org
> Cc: jnc@ginger.lcs.mit.edu
> Subject: RE: GSE IDs [Re: IETF multihoming powder: just add 
> IPv6 and stir]
> 
> 
>     > From: "Bound, Jim" <Jim.Bound@hp.com>
> 
>     > 8+8 (my preferred term for GSE)
> 
> The two are fairly different, actually.
> 
> 8+8 was originally proposed by Dave Clark, and it was 
> splitting the IPv6
> address into two fields, a 64-bit globally unique identifier 
> in the low part, and a locator in the high part.
> 
> GSE was an enhancement to that done by Mike O'Dell in which 
> the high order parts (of both source and destination) were 
> massaged by border routers to achieve various things. It 
> brings a number of additional capabilities, but at the cost 
> of making the location<->identity binding even harder to 
> secure. (Unless you just throw your hands in the air and use 
> authentication on all packets, at which point the address 
> becomes irrelevant.)
> 
> 	Noel
> 
>