In your previous mail you wrote: You can't have one IS-IS system span beyond a site boundary, since the site-local addresses would not be guaranteed unique. You could certainly have multiple IS-IS systems within the boundary of a single site, with some sort of routing between them - static would work, RIPng, and even BGP (are site-local prefixes allowed in BGP?) => (about last point) site-local prefixes are allowed in BGP NLRIs if they are not exported outside the site (so be really careful, i.e. this is *not* recommended). Site-local addresses are allowed for next-hops if all iBGP speakers are in the site and : - or eBGP peers are in the site too (a strange site, isn't it? :-) - or self-next-hop feature is used in order to hide addresses of eBGP peers. Note that in the last case the eBGP address/next-hop is very local (my main concern about draft-kato-bgp-ipv6-link-local-00.txt is there is no explanation about the self-next-hop feature) and the global/link-local issue for next-hops reversed.
Regards [EMAIL PROTECTED] -------------------------------------------------------------------- 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] --------------------------------------------------------------------
