Ya, I guess using non-ip-addresses for the refs is a good idea for networks that involve non IP-based hops.
Would it be possible to have a router do reference pass-through? I'm thinking of a kind of double-NAT situation where I might want router 1 to delegate the routing of refs to router 2. WAN <--> R1 <--> R2 <--> Clients On Tue, Feb 14, 2023 at 10:08 PM waldemar <walde...@wdmsys.com> wrote: > > I was not thinking of chaining, this sounds like source routing, I am > not sure. Cascading is certainly possible. The destination may rewrite > one IPREF address into another IPREF address. This could be done > multiple times. > > I wanted to avoid any sort of negotiations, any kind of time dependency, > and I was trying to minimize amount of information shared between peers. > The peers don't trust each other that much except to agree to > communicate. Using real addresses leads to negotiations and requires > knowledge of peers address spaces and protocols, so that was not a good > option. I was thinking of peer networks (multiplayer games, NAT > traversal), high delay networks (space networks), and highly secure > networks (financial, military). I thought avoiding negotiations would be > the key. I was also convinced we'll be dealing with more than one > network protocol for a while, hence no dependency on a single protocol. > IPREF might speed up unification, especially IPv6 in the Internet, but > it could also make it easier to develop specialized network protocols. > Maybe for high delay networks, maybe for highly secure networks, or > maybe for simplified networks. > > On 2/14/23 12:25, Evan Pratten wrote: > > I find this very interesting. > > > > Would it be possible to chain references? for example > > 10.0.0.1+700+800? I can't think of a use case for this, but I'm sure > > it would cross someone's mind to try. > > > > The way I see this, IPREF is essentially encoding some or all of the > > route to the final host in the address. Why not use real IPs all the > > way down? For example: 10.0.0.1+10.0.0.4. This wouldn't require any > > translation of reference numbers. Although, would make things less > > dynamic. > > > > --- > > Evan Pratten (VA3ZZA) > > https://ewpratten.com > > > > On Tue, Feb 14, 2023 at 11:10 AM waldemar <walde...@wdmsys.com> wrote: > >> Hello, > >> > >> I have submitted a new -00 draft, > >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-augustyn-intarea-ipref/. I am new > >> to this, although I worked on an RFC some 15 years ago. I have contacted > >> ADs for the area who advised me to seek feedback on this list. Please, > >> provide your thoughts. I will be also submitting proper declarations in > >> compliance with BCP 79. I need more time for this. > >> > >> Thank you > >> Waldemar Augustyn > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Int-area mailing list > >> Int-area@ietf.org > >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area _______________________________________________ Int-area mailing list Int-area@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
