At Mon, 28 Oct 2002 15:52:14 -0500 (EST), Dan Lanciani wrote:
> 
> Any language that reduces site-local addresses to second-class citizens (or,
> worse, implies that they should not be used concurrent with global addresses)
> will give stack and application vendors an excuse to fail to support such
> configurations.  I don't think you want to open such a huge can of worms as
> it will entail revisiting every problem that has been ``resolved'' with an
> admonition to simply use site-local addresses.

If site-local was the answer, what were the questions?  (No joke intended)
Do you have a list?
--------------------------------------------------------------------
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