Comparing alternative approaches for networking of named objects in the future Internet

This paper describes and compares alternative architectures for achieving the functional goals of name oriented networking. The CCN (content-centric network) scheme proposed by Van Jacobson is contrasted with hybrid name and address based routing proposed in conjunction with the MobilityFirst (MF) future Internet architecture. In a CCN network, routers forward data directly on content names (such as URNs), achieving elegant and efficient retrieval of content files; the framework can also be extended to other communications services such as VoIP. The MF scheme supports name-based communication services by introducing the concept of a flat `globally unique identifier (GUID)', which is used as the authoritative header for routing. Further, the GUID is dynamically mapped to one or more topological network addresses using a global name resolution service (GNRS). This leads to a hybrid GUID and network address based routing (HGN) scheme in which routers operate with both flat names (GUIDs) and network addresses, reducing routing table size and overhead at the cost of a fast distributed service for dynamic mapping of names to addresses. Protocol operations for both CCN and HGN are outlined in context of specific services including content retrieval, unicast and mobility. Preliminary evaluations of scalability and performance for both schemes are given using simple analytical models and selected results from Internet-scale simulations for GNRS and BGP.