[ih] Why did location/identity separation not happen? (Was: Internet without entrenched factions?)

[Greg Skinner]

On May 17, 2026, at 12:43 PM, Jack Haverty via Internet-history <internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:
> 
> Hi Noel,
> 
> The issues of location and identity that I first remember seeing were in John Schoch's IEN in 1978 - see https://www.rfc-editor.org/ien/ien19.txt
> 
> This was a seminal document that influenced the decisions made when TCP V2 was evolving into TCP/IP V4.  I recall discussions in some meeting about how one system's "address" is another system's "name".  The whole issue of Naming, Addressing, and Routing was on the ICCB's list of "things to work on" back in the early 1980s.    I wasn't involved in the IPV6 discussions so I'm not sure what was discussed there.  It's possible that the ICCB's to-do list got lost as the people moved around.
> 
> /Jack Haverty
> 

I found out a few more things that may be of help.  Very early in the email archives of the lisp WG, there is a charter that mentions RFC 4984, an IAB workshop on routing and addressing. [1] [2] The workshop description provides a reading list, including Mike O’Dell’s GSE draft. [3] (Unfortunately, the link to the draft goes to Geoff Huston’s potaroo recent articles page, but the draft can be retrieved from the datatracker. [4]. Incidentally, IEN19 is one of the reading list entries.) Lixia participated in the workshop, so perhaps she would comment on any additional ties between these efforts and ICCB work.

--gregbo

[1] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lisp/FqNh_G6aNy6QrYfRRYNwvJ1Dz4o/
[2] https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc4984.txt
[3] https://datatracker.ietf.org/group/rtgadrws/about/
[4] https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-ipngwg-gseaddr-00.txt