FYI. Regards, Thomas Trede -----Original Message----- From: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org <Internet-Drafts@ietf.org> To: "IETF-Announce:;;;;@ns.cnri.reston.va.us;"@Eng.Sun.COM;;; <"IETF-Announce:;;;;@ns.cnri.reston.va.us;"@Eng.Sun.COM;;;> Cc: ipng@sunroof.Eng.Sun.COM <ipng@sunroof.Eng.Sun.COM> Date: Dienstag, 24. November 1998 00:19 Subject: (IPng 6771) I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-ipngwg-esd-analysis-03.txt
A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the IPNG Working Group of the IETF.
Title : Separating Identifiers and Locators in Addresses: An Analysis of the GSE Proposal for IPv6 Author(s) : M. Crawford, A. Mankin, T. Narten, J. Stewart, L. Zhang Filename : draft-ietf-ipngwg-esd-analysis-03.txt Pages : 50 Date : 20-Nov-98
On February 27-28, 1997, the IPng Working Group held an interim meeting in Palo Alto, California to consider adopting Mike O'Dell's 'GSE - An Alternate Addressing Architecture for IPv6' proposal [GSE]. In GSE, 16-byte IPv6 addresses are split into distinct portions for global routing, local routing and end-point identification. GSE includes the feature of configuring a node internal to a site with only the local routing and end-point identification portions of the address, thus hiding the full address from the node. When such a node generates a packet, only the low-order bytes of the source address are specified; the high-order bytes of the address are filled in by a border router when the packet leaves the site.
There is a long history of a vague assertion in certain circles that IPv4 'got it wrong' by treating its addresses simultaneously as locators and identifiers. Despite these claims, however, there was never a complete proposal for a scaleable network protocol which separated the functions. As a result, it wasn't possible to do a serious analysis comparing and contrasting a 'separated' architecture and an 'overloaded' architecture. The GSE proposal serves as a vehicle for just such an analysis, and that is the purpose of this paper.
We conclude that an architecture that clearly separates locators and identifiers in addresses introduces new issues and problems that do not have an easy or clear solution. Indeed, the alleged disadvantages of overloading addresses turn out to provide some significant benefits over the non-overloaded approach.
Internet-Drafts are available by anonymous FTP. Login with the username "anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After logging in, type "cd internet-drafts" and then "get draft-ietf-ipngwg-esd-analysis-03.txt". A URL for the Internet-Draft is: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ipngwg-esd-analysis-03.txt
Internet-Drafts directories are located at:
Africa: ftp.is.co.za
Europe: ftp.nordu.net ftp.nic.it
Pacific Rim: munnari.oz.au
US East Coast: ftp.ietf.org
US West Coast: ftp.isi.edu
Internet-Drafts are also available by mail.
Send a message to: mailserv@ietf.org. In the body type: "FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ipngwg-esd-analysis-03.txt".
NOTE: The mail server at ietf.org can return the document in MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility. To use this feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before the "FILE" command. To decode the response(s), you will need "munpack" or a MIME-compliant mail reader. Different MIME-compliant mail readers exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with "multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which have been split up into multiple messages), so check your local documentation on how to manipulate these messages.
Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the Internet-Draft.
ENCODING mime FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ipngwg-esd-analysis-03.txt