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

[Pekka Nikander <pekka.nikander@nomadiclab.com>]

Jim,

Bound, Jim wrote:
> Yes the HIP SPI could use the low order 64 bits but I want to read
> updates from Pekka N. just sent out for arch-03.  I am also unclear the
> HIP code changes to our transport layers or at the IP layers will be
> done by what time frame.
HIP, in the way we implement it today, does not require any
changes to the transport layers at all, or to the IP layer
in anywhere else but at the end-hosts.  That is, of course,
not the only way to implement HIP, and it is probably also
possible to "distribute" HIP between an end-host and a
middle box, resulting in something that resembles MHAP.

In our current implementation, the only changes in the
kernel are in IPsec ESP code.  All the rest is in user
level, and the user level deamon dynamically modifies the
IPsec SPD and SA entries to implement mobility.

Implementing multi-homing will require more extensive changes
to IPsec or elsewhere in the kernel.  We are still thinking
on how to do that.  Basically, we need to implement destination
address selection somewhere in the kernel.  (At this stage
we will be ignoring the actual selection algorithm, and concentrate
on the architecture:  Where to "rewrite" the HIT into an IP
address, and how to select the right destination (and source)
address(es).)

--Pekka Nikander