Re: [rrg] RRG recommendation

[Tony Li <tony.li at tony.li>]

Scott Brim wrote:
> Excerpts from William Herrin on Wed, Nov 11, 2009 07:04:54PM -0500:
> > Important consequences of this are:
> >
> > a. Locators aren't about network attachments. They're about the
> > packet forwarding process and more abstractly about the network
> > topology. An element that always has exactly one attachment to the
> > network is likely a holy grail. Case and point, the IP address on my
> > BGP router with two upstreams is certainly a locator but it clearly
> > has two points of attachment.
>
> I think this conflates two things we distinguished for a while, and
> the distinction should not be lost.  I don't remember the name for the
> second one, but we have
>
>   - names for a network attachment points ("locator")
>
>   - information used for forwarding at intermediate hops (forwarding
>     directives?  something like that.  was it Noel's?)

Indeed, if you have explicit forwarding instructions, you use that.

Locators are necessarily about network attachments (per stack).  If a 
host has multiple points of attachment, then it should have multiple 
locators.  And only one identifier.

Regards,
Tony