In your previous mail you wrote:
The IPv6 working group chairs reading of the mailing list discussion
regarding removing site-local addresses from the IPv6 architecture is that
there is not a consensus to make this change.
From the email discussion we also believe there is a consensus to not
require IPv6 implementations to support connectivity to multiple
sites. The suggestion made by Tim Hartrick on the list is a reasonable way
to resolve the requirement level of site-local. Specifically:
>What I would like to see come out of this long discussion is simply some text
>in the in progress "Node Requirements" document that specifies how much
of the
>scoped address architecture MUST be implemented and that that text would say
>that the rules specified in Draves' draft are the only MUST implement portion
>of the architecture. There should be no requirement that a node be able
to be
>part of more than one zone.
We believe the resulting actions from this discussion are:
- No change to the IPv6 address architecture regarding site local
- No change to the "Default Address Selection for IPv6" draft
- Text to be added to the "IPv6 Node Requirements" draft as outlined by
Tim Hartrick text (above).
- The working group should complete the Scoped Address Architecture draft.
Bob Hinden, Steve Deering, Margaret Wasserman
IPv6 working group chairs
=> I officially support this consensus (modulo the default address
selection document, I believe my opinion about it is already well-known).
I congratulate the chairs on this attempt to clarify the site-local
discussion.
Thanks
[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]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
