At 15:45 15/09/2005, Pekka Nikander wrote:
... But if I see identification, authentication and routing matters
being addressed, I see proposed changes enough to suspect that this
will affect the level above (DNS) and below (IP addressing).
I don't see any *necessary* changes to IP addressing; OTOH wide
spread use of HIP would certainly open new possibilities,
Dear Pekka,
Correct. I meant "affect" in the way of opening new possibilities.
Also probably leading to a directory structural applications.
like easier
network renumbering and easier interworking between IPv4 and IPv6.
I meant also things like I ask at the end: to address a path, so I am
sure the packet will travel the way the other end wants.
DNS, changes or at least extensions, definitely. That is an area of
active research. The Hi3 paper covered that from one point of view
briefly, but there are other proposals around.
Certainly. The DNS can be considered as a part of a more general, for
example ISO 11179 related, DRS (distributed registries system). HI is
a registry element as any other one. Its major advantage on names is
that it could be numeric, hence multilingual.
Also, a public key could be associated to every lingual space of
exchanges, trust and services.(SETS). This
I would suggest you try to think of simple, robust, scalable global
Internet architecture which would include your proposition and
permit a transparent transition.
I don't know what you mean with "transparent transition".
That a transition from current usage could be made as transparent as
possible to the users.
How would you support "ISP rotation": your Elm Street person has
several addresses and wants to rotate them with a defined pattern
within the same relation, for example for security purposes? (you
might call this a directed multi-homing?)
I don't understand why you call that "ISP rotation",
Let assume I have three ISPs on three lines. I want packets in a same
connection to travel through each of them on an equal or a given
basis. The rotation continuing on two if one loses connectivity, etc.
but yes, based
on your functional description, that should be fairly trivial. With
IPv6 and RFC3014(bis) addresses you might even get some level of
privacy, but see also our "BLIND" paper, on my publications page.
I note that you could also associate HI to predetermined paths as
well (anti-tapping protection)?
Maybe, but I don't see any easy way to do that. One of the points in
HIP is to loosen the currently tight binding between routing and
transport.
I understand it is a possibility. But if you point an HIP to a IP
list in a registry and use it?
All the best.
jfc
_______________________________________________
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf