Re: identity persistence and comparison issues

[marcelo bagnulo braun <mbagnulo@ing.uc3m.es>]

El 26/06/2004, a las 3:58, Joe Touch escribió:

> Brian E Carpenter wrote:
>
> > marcelo bagnulo braun wrote:
> ...
> > > >  The endpoints are the only place that can or should know about 
> > > > whether they change.
> > This is a purist view of the Internet we used to have when RFC 1958
> > was written... the current reality (RFC 2775) is that all these
> > problems call for soft state solutions, that can be garbage collected
> > as Marcelo says, and recreated if they are prematurely lost.
>
> Soft state elsewhere is an optimization that relies on hard state at 
> the endpoints for its recovery and recreation anyway. I.e., I don't 
> see yours and Marcelo's views as inconsistent.

One problem is that if the endpoints are incapable of obtaining the 
locators associated with a given identifier (as in HIP), it is 
impossible for the endpoints to recover the lost state, so perhaps 
having a mechanism for mapping id to locators is a must?

regards, marcelo



> > (The tragedy of NATs is that they can't do the second bit reliably,
> > and multi6 needs to avoid that problem.)
> >     Brian