On Sep 13, 2007, at 23:00 , Karl Auerbach wrote:
The idea is this: An "association" is an end-to-end relationship
between a pair of applications that potentially spans several
transport lifetimes.
Wouldn't that be the OSI session layer (that IP doesn't have)?
taking a cue from ISO/OSI, the trick is that the association layer
is merely a means for the applications to reliably exchange
checkpoint names. What those checkpoint names mean is up to the
applications - thus what to do if a rebinding to a new transport
requires going back to a checkpoint is something entirely within
the application and its networking library code, not some state
that is stored in the net.
We already do that today at the TCP layer. Rather than reinvent TCP
in all individual applications (all those checkpoints will be great
for performance!) it's much easier to hide changes in IP connectivity
from TCP. We also pretty much have that today, in the form of shim6.
Note thought that none of that solves renumbering, rather, it really
needs better renumbering support to work well.
(I have not really considered the security implications - in the
absence of some form of shared secret or other authentication on
association re-establishment there would probably be a race
condition in which an intruder could jump in.)
Seperating location and identity requires some pretty hefty security,
otherwise anyone can impersonate anyone.
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf