Re: Why did location/identity separation not happen? (Was: Internet without entrenched factions?)

> The whole issue of Naming, Addressing, and Routing


As a long-time, distant observer of this topic, I've been unclear about 
the expected use of some constructs, and suspect I haven't been alone.  
Compelling use cases often make the difference in garnering support, and 
clarifying design requirements.

I understand needing to identify a venue for a datagram in transit and 
then determining how to get to it.  I also understand the benefit of 
distinguishing among interfaces, since different i/fs can have very 
different paths to them.

So, for example, host/domain name and IP address had obvious use cases 
from the start.  Even more so, given decades of experience.

I've been less clear about the operational benefits of an additional 
identifier at the datagram level.  I mean, it sounds like a fine idea, 
but I was never able to crossed the bridge of and see a compelling 
need.  Especially since it seems like a higher-level construct of that 
sort should suffice.

Perhaps I've just missed the both.  But it seems clear I've had a lot of 
company.

And while the above isn't worded in the proper form, it is intended as 
an invitation...

d/

-- 
Dave Crocker

[email protected]
bluesky: @dcrocker.bsky.social
mast: @[email protected]
+1.408.329.0791

Volunteer, Silicon Valley Chapter
Northern California Coastal Region
Information & Planning Coordinator
American Red Cross
[email protected]

-- 
Internet-history mailing list
[email protected]
https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/internet-history
-
Unsubscribe: https://app.smartsheet.com/b/form/9b6ef0621638436ab0a9b23cb0668b0b?The%20list%20to%20be%20unsubscribed%20from=Internet-history