[RRG] Some concern about the flat label as identifier

[Xu Xiaohu <xuxh@huawei.com>]

> > Second, as I said above, I am quite unsure that the old way of
> > thinking of general purpose end system IDs is actually useful.  We
> > can have network-layer identities, or transport-layer ones, but
> > what will we use them for?
> 
> They are very useful for host mobility and multi-access.
> Architecturally, their economic value derives from them allowing a
> host a better capability of choice between operators in a multi-
> access situation.

Hi Pekka,

I have a concern about the business model of the HIP which uses HIT (flat
label) as host identifier.

Since the public key is self-generated by hosts and the HIT is the hash
value of the public key which has no organization semantics, how can the
id/loc mapping management been shared among different countries and
different service providers? I don't believe it's acceptable from both
political and economic aspects that all the mapping management is dominated
by a single company, such as Skype.

Best wishes,
Xiaohu XU



--
to unsubscribe send a message to rrg-request@psg.com with the
word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://psg.com/lists/rrg/> & ftp://psg.com/pub/lists/rrg