[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [RAM] revised draft proposed definitions
On 12 Jun 2007, at 06:58, Russ White wrote:
Earlier, someone else said:
Ok, but a locator does NOT denote reachability. Thus,
a locator is a string of bits that indicates a topological
location.
I think we should, perhaps, leave reachability out? It seems
like both a locator and and id indicate some element of
reachability (?).
Neither indicates reachability.
IE, if you have a locator, and no ID, then there is nothing to reach,
The locator might name a subnetwork, for example. That subnetwork
might well be reachable or might not be reachable.
but if you have an id, and no locator, there is no place to reach
it at.
Then one can name the node, but one doesn't know where the
node is located, (even if it happens to be reachable at that
instant in time at some specific location).
The original quote at top is correct. Having a locator does not
mean that there is a working forwarding path between one's
current location and the location named by that original loocator.
Purely as an example, an ACL somewhere along the path might
cause one's packets towards that location to be dropped.
Ran
_______________________________________________
RAM mailing list
RAM at iab.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ram