RE: Consensus on identifier/locator split?

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

Christian,  

You're getting specific on me and I was trying to stay at the
broad architectural level, in the hopes of making baby steps
forward.  Is there some version of the identifier/locator
split that you WOULD agree to?

Tony


|    -----Original Message-----
|    From: Christian Huitema [mailto:huitema@windows.microsoft.com] 
|    Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2003 11:07 AM
|    To: Tony Li; multi6@ops.ietf.org
|    Subject: RE: Consensus on identifier/locator split?
|    
|    
|    > I'd just like to get a sense from the group about where
|    > we are so far.  Do we have consensus about splitting
|    > the address into locators and identifiers?  Note that
|    > I'm NOT asking about specifics, like "how big", "what
|    > mappings exist", "is it secure", etc. Do we agree that
|    > we want to go down this path?
|    
|    No, I don't believe we have this consensus. Specifically, 
|    we don't have a consensus that a new category of 
|    identifiers should be created, and that this new category 
|    should be used by all applications and processed by all 
|    nodes. We also definitely don't have a consensus that any 
|    such identifiers should be visible "in the network", by 
|    opposition to say, session identifiers that are only 
|    visible end-to-end.
|     
|    -- Christian Huitema
|