Re: noid and applications (generic requirements from applications)

[Kurt Erik Lindqvist <kurtis@kurtis.pp.se>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


On torsdag, nov 13, 2003, at 04:11 Europe/Stockholm, Iljitsch van 
Beijnum wrote:

> On 12-nov-03, at 20:45, Erik Nordmark wrote:
>
>> The only thing to consider is when AID(A) isn't working as a locator 
>> when
>> C tries to contact it.
>
>> There are two choices:
>> C can detect that the locator doesn't work and do a reverse+forward 
>> DNS
>> lookup to get the whole locator set (Ls(A)).
>> or
>> The referal can include Ls(A) instead of just the AID(A); this 
>> requires
>> modifying existing IPv6 appication protocols which do referal.
>
> I think it would be a good idea to look at a referral API. Such an API 
> would allow a host to ask the system to create a neat little package 
> containing all the pertinent locator and identifier information, then 
> it can transmit this package to a correspondent and the correspondent 
> can then unwrap it and use the content to do whatever it needed the 
> referral for. The advantage of such a system is that it could allow 
> applications that need referral to be completely independent of lower 
> layer technologies, such as the multihoming solution we're going to 
> implement, and the differences between IPv4 and IPv6. The downside 
> would be that this referral package could get significantly larger 
> than a simple address.

Although I am tempted to say that a multi6 API with ULP hints, referral 
package, etc is a good idea - I am not sure I think that is where we 
should be right now. This will mean that applications will have to be 
rewritten in order to make full use of the mulihoming solution. Maybe 
this is another topic for Elliot's draft?

- - kurtis -

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 8.0.2

iQA/AwUBP7OI/qarNKXTPFCVEQJ8cQCeKBfMUtYSEFwanFY2sZj9RxpaGE0AoNtY
0VKIyNdVBv35PxbckPlLBvUX
=ChFb
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----