Re: Consensus on identifier/locator split?

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

Alain;

> >> To answer Tony's question, I think this split is unavoidable.
> >> The question is where it happens (bellow TCP, in TCP or above)

> > As I presented in Vienna, Web is not the Internet.
> >
> > TCP is not the Internet Protocol.
> 
> Correct, I should have said transport instead of TCP.

> That is one solution, but not the only one, and we may be OK
> with a solution that modifies a limited number of transport protocol,
> or with a solution that builds multihoming in a session layer on top
> of transport and that would work regardless of the underneath  
> protocols.

Solution?

As for solutions, transport and application layers must, of course,
be modified, as has been pointed out in my draft. There can be no
generic session layer defined over, say, UDP.

However, the split is at the IP layer, because it should be available
to all the transport layers.

The set of a limited number of transport protocol is not the Internet
Protocol.

						Masataka Ohta