Excerpts from Sam Hartman on Thu, Mar 19, 2009 09:11:46AM -0400: > As I discussed in my other message, it does not seem like an absolute > requirement that the same address can never be used both as an EID and > RLOC. A field itself cannot be purely for routing/forwarding or for identifying -- you cannot control what functions will use to do their jobs, and they will take anything they can get. You can assert that a field "is" a locator or an identifier, but you should understand that someone will always do something to break your theoretical purity. > Also, could I get feedback from the rest of the list on the text? > Do we want to adopt it? If not, what do we want to fix about it? I say we all know what we're talking about, so go with what we have, do the work, and conduct the terminology war in our spare time.
Note Well: Messages sent to this mailing list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.