I am a strong proponent of trying to find a way to create a new set of end
identifiers that would be insensitive to the changing of IP level addresses. It
seems to me that we would find ourselves working pretty hard to tease apart the
current strong binding of IP and TCP (pseudoheaders etc) but it may be well
worth the effort. For one thing, it might lead to the ability to carry TCP
segments over multiple Source/Destination pairs between the same hosts (labeled
by a single end point identifier each) in addition to allowing for rebinding of
endpoint identifier and IP address. The rendezvous and signalling problem of
concurrent motion is not unlike the challenge of TCP's simultaneous-INIT - you
have to get the fixed point right to make it all work. We have other fixed
points in the Internet, notably the root hint file, so perhaps it is not
unreasonable to consider another fixed point concept to facilitate simultaneous
rebinding of IP and endpoint identifiers. I suspect this ge!
ts pre
tty messy when you start to think about multicast but that's territory that
also needs exploring. We would also want to look very carefully at the
potential spoofing opportunity that rebinding would likely introduce.
Vint
At 05:44 PM 9/12/2003 -0400, Keith Moore wrote:
and of course neither SCTP or TCP would be sufficient by itself. we still
need a suitable identifier, a way to map those into locators, and a way to
maintain those mappings.
I'm still undecided about whether it is better to modify existing transports
or to do a mobile-IP like approach. The latter has tunneling overhead but
works for all transports and in some sense the changes are simpler.
Vint Cerf
SVP Technology Strategy
MCI
22001 Loudoun County Parkway, F2-4115
Ashburn, VA 20147
703 886 1690 (v806 1690)
703 886 0047 fax
vinton(_dot_)g(_dot_)cerf(_at_)mci(_dot_)com
www.mci.com/cerfsup