You didn't mean "locators are a lot easier to deal with if the name
has nothing to do with where the thing it names is", you meant
"locators are a lot easier to deal with if their meaning (i.e. the
thing they are bound to) is the same no matter where you are when
you evaluate them".
This is a problem for PIP-like schemes and mobility. At any point in
the network, the locator to use to reach a particular target is
unique. However, the locator to use to reach a particular target is
different at every point. That would be okay except that when *I*
move, the way I address a target changes.
well, no. it would be okay if the only apps you needed to run were
two-party apps. in other words, it's not just users and hosts that need
addresses to be the same from everywhere in the network - apps need
stable addressing so that a process on host A can say to a process on
host B, "contact this process on host C at address X and port Y"
_______________________________________________
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf