apart from a general analysis confusion between what is a "name" and what is an "address" (which may concern users as well as objects), and an obvious US nexus of the IETF analysed in RFC 3774, which too often leads the debate to be based on US examples only (i.e. on 1/192 of the number of the world's legal cultures and technical and commecial experiences - look at the US only comments on ISDN). But even in the USA each citizen has a SSN. Even in the USA streets are given a name, and houses a nr.
The SSN analogy isn't perfect; technically US citizens aren't required to have an SSN, and a million or so do not.
Street names and numbers are a perfect example of what we're discussing, though; do you propose that we completely redesign the mail and road system such that people can take their addresses with them when they move? That's exactly what you're talking about doing to IP.
The confusion comes from a lack of anlysis of the real world, of a good model that everyone will accept, understand and use.
No, you're the only one that's confused. The IETF has a well-defined model and definitions for names and addresses, and you are willfully ignoring those definitions to hide the fact your arguments make no sense.
S
Stephen Sprunk "God does not play dice." --Albert Einstein
CCIE #3723 "God is an inveterate gambler, and He throws the
K5SSS dice at every possible opportunity." --Stephen Hawking
_______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf