Re: Consensus on identifier/locator split?

[Brian E Carpenter <brc@zurich.ibm.com>]

My answer is yes, this is the way to go.

In answer to Christian, I would comment that *everything*
I say on this list is conditioned by sections 3.2.2 and 3.2.3
of draft-ietf-multi6-multihoming-requirements-07. That
rather drastically limits the forms of id/loc split
I am willing to contemplate, when we fly down from
the 10,000 meter level of Tony's question.

   Brian
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Brian E Carpenter 
Distinguished Engineer, Internet Standards & Technology, IBM 

NEW ADDRESS <brc@zurich.ibm.com> PLEASE UPDATE ADDRESS BOOK

Tony Li wrote:
> 
> Folks,
> 
> I don't mean to disrupt other constructive conversations,
> so please carry on with those.
> 
> 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?
> 
> Silence is not assent...
> 
> Thanks,
> Tony