[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: identity persistence and comparison issues
Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
On 28-jun-04, at 14:45, Erik Nordmark wrote:
And if the long-lived ID is one of the locators we can provide
for unmodified applications which do referrals and callbacks.
We should really talk to some apps people to figure out how important
this is. It's entirely trivial to shoot yourself in the foot today with
NAT or multiple addresses anyway, and then there is dual stack. How are
referrals going to work when a future participant in the communication
may be limited to one IP version, which happens to be the other one than
the one used by current participants?
It may very well be that apps and protocols need to be changed anyway in
order to work with IPv6, or IPv4+IPv6.
The point is that today, the underlying assumption of most applications
is that the IP address they get back from an A or AAAA query, or any
other source including manual config, is a permanent identifier with
the nice property that the routing system can use it as a locator.
NAT breaks this assumption of course. But we are trying to repair the
damage done by NAT. So I suggest that a multi6 goal should be that the
thing an application gets back from an AAAA query, or any other source
including manual config, must be a permanent identifier with the
nice property that something below the socket API can transform it
into a locator.
Which leads me to wonder whether session survival for sessions using
temporary things such as RFC 3041 addresses is a reasonable goal for