Hi Tony,

At 02:47 PM 10/28/02, Tony Hain wrote:
I have a basic problem with this thread. We have a few people discussing
fundamental changes in close to a vacuum.
Obviously, a few people can't make a fundamental change to IPv6.
But, we can propose a change, and discuss it on the WG (which
should not resemble a vacuum).

The whole idea that SL should be revoked if a global is available is
bogus. It is certainly reasonable for the manufacturer of light switches
to only support SL/LL rather than potentially multiple global prefixes.
What would a light switch do differently to support site-local as
opposed to global?  It still needs to get a prefix from a router and
combine it with an IID using address autoconf.  So, I don't understand
what system requirements could be eliminated by refusing to support
global prefixes.

I've spent much of the last 7+ years working on IPv6 stacks for
embedded systems, and they have all supported global addressing.

Margaret


--------------------------------------------------------------------
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]
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply via email to