Steve,
>At 11:19 PM -0400 6/26/00, Jim Bound wrote:
>>Hello, Mr. Customer I am vendor X and here is my new IPv6 product, but
>>beware it will break your network server apps but go ahead implement
>>sitelocal addresses with overlapping servers.
>By "overlapping server", do you mean a server directly connected to more
>than one site? If so, sensible vendors Y and Z would say:
Yes I believe that was obvious sorry if it was not and I too terse.
Hello, Mr. Customer I am vendor Y and here is my new IPv6 product
[ported in two hours from my old IPv4 product]. If you are using
site-local addressing, be aware that each site will need its own
copy of the server. We have a special deal for you if you buy more
than one. :-)
Well 2 hours is a bit short but ISVs will not want to mess with their
architecture for applications either and thats what this is all about.
Also not all customers want two servers.
Hello, Mr. Customer I am vendor Z and here is my new IPv6 product
which has been enhanced to support multiple sites from the same server.
That would mean having to differentiate sin6_scope_id for each address
which is not well defined today for anyone. Also with my thought of a
fix this all becomes uncessary if we use the rsvd bits in site-local to
provide uniqueness.
Not a big fan of site-locals in DNS either but thats another discussion.
>It should appear in the ID directories in a day or two. It was posted
>to the ipng list on March 22, so if you archive past ipng mail, you
>might find it sooner there. (Or send me mail and I will send you a
>personal copy.)
I am sured I pulled it over. Hmmm...................
thanks,
/jim
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List
IPng Home Page: http://playground.sun.com/ipng
FTP archive: ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng
Direct all administrative requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
