[RRG] re: Some concern about the flat label as identifier

[Xu Xiaohu <xuxh@huawei.com>]

> > I have a concern about the business model of the HIP which uses HIT
> > (flat label) as host identifier.
> 
> It seems it is more correct to say that the identifier is the HI, not
> the HIT.

However, in most cases the HIT plays the role of identifier. The HI is only
resorted when there is a conflict on the HIT.

> > how can the id/loc mapping management been shared among different
> > countries and different service providers?
> 
> There are several ways. One is to use the DNS (draft-ietf-hip-dns)
> with all its limitations but also its strengths.

I don't think DNS is an optimal option since this approach requires every
host should have a FQDN name.

> Another one is the use of a DHT (draft-ahrenholz-hiprg-dht). The DHT
> spreads the identifiers "at random". If you prefer more control on the
> placement of keys, see draft-mathy-lisp-dht.

If I understood the draft-mathy-lisp-dht correctly, the idea in this draft
is based on the hierarchical identifier, e.g. IP address, which can be
allocated and managed in a hierarchical way. So the idea in this draft is
not suitable for flat label used in HIP.

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