RE: [RRG] Consensus? End-user networks need their own portable address space

["Tony Li" <tony.li@tony.li>]

|> The key point for this group is simply this: the IP address *is* an 
|> identifier, an index key, and many other things that we'll 
|never fully 
|> know.  It is possible to change, but only gradually over 
|time.  If it 
|> doesn't have to, all the better.
|
|Whats your conclusion?  That we need to assume the IP address will be 
|used as an identifier by higher layers for the foreseeable future, and 
|figure out how to live with it?


My conclusion is that if we want to truly fix the architecture, we need to
have an explicit, distinguishable identifier partitioned from the locator.
Yes, the transition to this is not smooth, but unless we create a new
namespace, we are effectively endorsing the semantic overload that we have
today and will have to live with it in perpetuity.

People have used the address as an identifier precisely because they had no
other choice.  We have the opportunity to give them a better alternative.

Tony


--
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