HIP new possibilities

["JFC (Jefsey) Morfin" <jefsey at jefsey.com>]

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 mailing list
Ietf at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf