On Mar 8, 2011, at 11:21 09AM, Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu wrote:
On Tue, 08 Mar 2011 08:43:53 EST, Steven Bellovin said:
It wouldn't -- couldn't -- work that way. Leaving out longer paths (for many, many reasons) and sticking to 64-bit addresses, every host would have a 64-bit address: a gateway and a local address. For multihoming, there might be two or more such pairs. (Note that this isn't true loc/id split, since the low-order 32 bits aren't unique.) There's no pathalias problem at all, since we don't try to have a unique turtlevax section.
Sticking to 64-bit won't work, because some organizations *will* try to dig themselves out of an RFC1918 quagmire and get reachability to "the other end of our private net" by applying this 4 or 5 times to get through the 4 or 5 layers of NAT they currently have. And then some other dim bulb will connect one of those 5 layers to the outside world...
Those are just a few of the "many, many reasons" I alluded to... The "right" fix there is to define AA records that only have pairs of addresses. --Steve Bellovin, http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~smb