Re: identity persistence and comparison issues

> NAT breaks this assumption of course. But we are trying to repair the
> damage done by NAT. So I suggest that a multi6 goal should be that the
> thing an application gets back from an AAAA query, or any other source
> including manual config, must be a permanent identifier with the
> nice property that something below the socket API can transform it
> into a locator.

Agreed, except that temporary/permanent is not binary but a continutiy
of different lifetimes.

> Which leads me to wonder whether session survival for sessions using
> temporary things such as RFC 3041 addresses is a reasonable goal for
> multi6.

rfc 3041 temporary addresses have a default valid lifetime of 1 week.
So why wouldn't be reasonable for connections using such addresses
to be able to survive failures that last for a few minutes or hours?

Having said that, solutions which rely on the DNS for verifications
might be tricky unless the RFC 3041 addresses have forward and reverse DNS
entires (with a temporary FQDN to prevent correlation to the other
IP addresses of the host).

But this difficulty should distract from the desirability of making
things work for RFC 3041 addresses IMHO.

   Erik