On Fri, 22 Mar 2002, Hesham Soliman (ERA) wrote: > > > => For all those opposing the addition of the bit > > > in the IID, I really hope you would carefully consider > > > Jari's text above. For mechanisms designed to prove > > > address ownership (relevant to securing ND, MIPv6 BUs > > > and I can think of more), you MUST include the > > > distinction in the _IP_address. The IP address _is_ > > > the identifier relevant for this case, not the host > > > name, URL or anything else. > > > > Two destination addresses, one that requires verification > > by stronger > > means, one which does not. > > => ?? Which part of my message are you answering ?
I was just pointing out a possible alternative to reserving bits in the source addresses. -- Pekka Savola "Tell me of difficulties surmounted, Netcore Oy not those you stumble over and fall" Systems. Networks. Security. -- Robert Jordan: A Crown of Swords -------------------------------------------------------------------- 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] --------------------------------------------------------------------
