[e2e] a means to an end

Scott Brim swb at employees.org
Mon Nov 10 11:33:13 PST 2008

Excerpts from Fred Baker at 16:00:23 -0800 on Fri  7 Nov 2008:
> > can anyone explain how that clear explanation of the endpoint ID  
> > matches with the definition of endpoint ID given in RFC5050, section  
> > 4.4?
> About the same way the description maps to the endpoint ID found in  
> RFC 5201-5201 and 5338. Like HIP's Endpoint ID, DTN's Bundle ID lacks  
> any way for a system, given knowledge of what instance of an  
> application it wants to talk with or what data object it wants to  
> find, to determine the locator of that object. Given the locator we  
> can establish whether we are talking to the right system, but not the  
> other way around.

This is tripping over some conflation of identifiers.  There can be
many identifiers in play at one time, for the same or different
functions.  An ID that you would use to find a process to talk to does
not have to be the same as the ID you would use for session control or
session authentication.  A HIP HI can be used for both (but doesn't
have to be), but afaik a Bundle ID cannot.

More information about the end2end-interest mailing list