Re: Architecture [Re: Agenda for Vienna]

[Masataka Ohta <mohta@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>]

Brian;

> Tony Li wrote:
> ...
> > This implies that we should not be looking at particular
> > proposals.  We should not even be looking at 'categories'
> > of proposals.  Instead, we should be talking about possible
> > architectures.  That's one layer farther up.
> 
> This is *very* important. In the proposed second session, please
> let us concentrate on the architectural model of each of the
> two solution classes you want to explore.

My draft draft-ohta-e2e-multihoming-03.txt:

               The Architecture of End to End Multihoming

discusses, as is obvious from its title, architectural issue on
host based approach. It, of course, mention loc/id separation.

> For example, whether we achieve identifier/locator separation
> by encapsulation, rewriting, 2-addresses-in-1-header, or
> 2-halves-in-1-address should be an implementation detail in
> the first level of discussion.

That's rather an implementation detail than an architecural
issue.

The more important architecural issue is which part of the Internet
protocol suits must/should/may be affected.

In my draft, I, so far, have identified, IP, TCP, non-TCP applications,
DNS and IGP.

						Masataka Ohta