[e2e] a means to an end

[Fred Baker]

It's kind of hard to get a message to a destination, fixed or mobile,  
without giving the network an idea of where it is to go. That's kind  
of the point of the locator.

That said, the point of the endpoint ID is to identify the application  
on the system, the transport connection endpoint, independent of its  
location. If the application moves from one system to another, the  
transport connection needs to be able to follow it.

Gee whiz. RFCs 1483, 1753, 1922, 2102, and 2103.

On Nov 6, 2008, at 12:06 PM, David P. Reed wrote:

> Why should "location" be relevant to networking?   Must all wires be  
> buried permanently in the ground?  Does wireless and mobility not  
> occur?
>
> Michael Welzl wrote:
>> On Wed, 2008-11-05 at 13:26 +0100, Ali Ghodsi wrote:
>>
>>> Jon Crowcroft wrote:
>>>
>>>> but, BUT this is sidestepping the big problem
>>>> which is to have a service which hosts the id<->loc mapping,  
>>>> which actually scales to the size of the expected workload...
>>>>
>>> Can DHTs be part of the solution, and if not, what are the  
>>> essential features which they are lacking? (trying to fish for  
>>> research problems)
>>>
>>
>> Location dependance, which even the "id" part should
>> have (at least in the form of some concept of "nearness").
>>
>> This was pointed out quite convincingly (IMO) by John Day
>> in his "patterns in network architecture" book.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Michael
>>
>>
>>
>>