Keith Moore wrote: > I don't get the sense that we have consensus on this, because > some people seem to think that scoped addresses are > appropriate for use by general-purpose apps. > > for instance, there's really no way that an application can > effectively use > a scoped address in a referral to another host, since the app > has no idea > whether the host that uses the referral has access to the > same scope as > the party providing the referral. name-to-address mapping is > only one instance of this problem.
An implementation note which identifies the need for any multi-party apps to have a scope determination mechanism before using SL is appropriate. Claiming SL is something that applications can't effectively use is a bit over the top. For a simple 2 party app (like sending a file to my printer), SL is a very appropriate addressing mechanism. If I don't want the world to connect to my printers, it is much easier to filter FEC0::/16 at the border than it is to list every printer in an access control list. A multi-party app developer should be happy there is a specific range of addresses set aside for SL. Without that it becomes a guessing game as to which addresses might work or not. With SL, the multi-party app can clearly state that those will not be used, so the environment becomes much clearer. Tony -------------------------------------------------------------------- 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] --------------------------------------------------------------------
