> Color me clueless, but why can't you give them a > global prefix, but just not advertise their route > past the administrative boundary you choose (eg, > the lab)? Why is an IETF sanctioned "don't route > this prefix beyond where you should route it -- > which, by the way, you decide where ``beyond'' is" > better than just blackholing the actual prefixes > you want to contain?
From: Randy Bush <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Steven M. Bellovin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Fwd: IPv6 Scoped Addresses and Routing Protocols Date: Thu, 06 Jun 2002 11:24:57 -0700 > My strong preference would be to drop site-local addresses completely. > I think they're an administrative and technical nightmare. trying to solve a routing problem by an ill-understood addressing hack. randy -------------------------------------------------------------------- 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] --------------------------------------------------------------------
