Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2002 18:31:14 -0400
From: Keith Moore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
| seems like you really want some address space that
| - is unique
| - isn't provider-based
| - can be routed between private nets
"provider based" is wrong, "isn't topologically based" is what would
be needed, so I get to retain the same addresses regardless of how my
connectivity to the net happened to change.
And the third needs to be "can be routed" without qualification.
All that you need to do is come up with the address space and routing
solution that meets those criteria (kind of like IPv4 addresses were in
the 80's and before) and then I'll certainly agree that we don't need
site local addresses, or some other replacement for them.
Until then however, we do.
kre
--------------------------------------------------------------------
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]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
