On 2012-02-18 08:10, Bob Hinden wrote:
Noel,
On Feb 17, 2012, at 10:32 AM, Noel Chiappa wrote:
From: Bob Hinden <bob(_dot_)hinden(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com>
the other reason why we went with 128-bit address with a 64/64 split
as the common case and defining IIDs that indicate if they have
global uniqueness. This creates a framework that an ID/locator split
could be implemented. ... we have a framework that would allow it
without having to roll out another version of IP.
Alas, the inclusion of _both halves_ of the IPv6 address in the TCP
checksum means the framework you speak of is basically useless for an
identity/location split.
That's why I described it as a framework. The TCP pseudo-checksum would have
to change and likely the addition of some sort of authentication at
connection establishment to associate an identifiers with a set of locators.
Not trivial, but doable.
Authentication is not just doable, but done, in shim6. However,
shim6 ducks the checksum issue by being a shim. ILNP deals with
it up front, but is a bigger change from vanilla IPv6. The
flexibility is there, but it's academic until we get IPv6 widely
deployed.
Brian
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf