On Mar 18, 2009, at 6:06 PM, Robin Whittle wrote:
End-to-end transparency (the packet received is identical to
that sent, including its source and destination addresses, but
not including hop limit etc.) is a major component of the
Internet's flexible and open-ended nature.
I'm actually of a slightly different opinion. I think it is important
that one application instance be able to select another application
instance, or a set of them, and send packets to all of those
applications, one of them, or a specific one as it requires. That
doesn't mean that the process knows anything about what is happening
below the application layer; in fact, that would be about naming those
application instances, and the fact that it can name and exchange
sessions with sets of applications that it is authorized access to
implies nothing further than that.
I also think it is important that one transport endpoint be able to
select another transport endpoint, or a set of them, and send packets
to all of those transport endpoints, one of them, or a specific one as
it requires. That doesn't mean that the transport endpoint knows
anything about what is happening below the transport layer beyond a
string of bits that it uses to identify the far end; in fact, that
would be about addressing those transport endpoints, and the fact that
it can address and exchange datagrams with sets of transport endpoints
that it is authorized access to implies nothing further than that.
The fact that a system, and by extension the applications and
transports on it, can identify other systems by name or address is the
critical bit, not that every system in the network uses the same name
or address. If that were not true, multi-named systems and multihomed
systems would be a problem, as would multicast and anycast.
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf