marcelo bagnulo braun wrote:
- I think I am more or less ok with this option, too. The only problem I see is that for privacy reasons (for example, maybe there are other reasons), a host might want to hide some of his addresses to certain peers, while showing them to other peers. If this can be statically configured, then the (implementable) virtual host is sufficient. But in this case, it will be *prohibited* by the specification to ever announce addresses from both sets. What I want to emphasize is that if a host decides to separate addresses by using a virtual host concept, it will be absolutely impossible next (unless changing the global configuration, and accepting possible unrecoverable context confusions) to mix the two sets. I see this like a limitation, but if everyone agrees with that, I won't insist more... :-) - Another, less problematic, thing, is that probably it could be useful to clearly specify somewhere in the draft the requirement to send all locators to all peers (As I discovered this requirement only by deduction after careful analysis). Or is it already done ?El 22/11/2006, a las 23:38, Erik Nordmark escribió:Sébastien Barré wrote:Now, there is an extreme solution for both cases :- if following current spec, send all locators, then tune with locators preferences (as proposed earlier in this mail)Why is this "extreme" in your mind? That's how the protocol is designed AFAICT.- if supporting scenario 1, having a local configuration that enforcesdisjoint locator sets to stay disjoint during the whole life of the system. This seems to be more or less the solution of virtual hosts, and could probably be dealt with entirely as an implementation problem (because the requirement to check the context tag *and* the destination locator could then be replaced by the use of separate context tag spaces).That seems like a sensible (and not "extreme") approach to me.i am ok with this option, just wanted to verify that we are all on the same on this....does anyone has a problem with this approach?
(i will be shipping the next version of the draft this weekend, i am already one week late from what we agreed on san diego :-(
yes, my apologies to have sent my comments so late... regards, Sébastien.
Regards, marceloErik