Thomas, >> Michel Py wrote: >> There is ample evidence to support the fact that the >> customer (the network administrator) wants, if not >> site-local, at least something that provides what >> site-local does; and that they will continue using >> them the way they see fit regardless of the fact that >> the IETF could try to restrict their use or not. Keep >> the customer happy.
> Thomas Narten wrote: > It would be good if this WG could come to some sort > of understanding/consensus of what it is that the > "customer" wants per the above "something that provides > what site-local does". > [snip] > - provide a better solution that meets the actual needs > without necessarily even using SLs. I believe this would be fine with many, as I can't recall anybody that supported site-locals doing it for the site-locals themselves but for what they provide, see below. > Do you have some specifics you can cite here? There are been other posts contributing this, which I agree with: - Not globally routable. - No registration. - No cost. My personal view on this is that there needs to be some ambiguity as well, for two reasons: a) Ambiguous addresses would obviously be a smaller block which in turn would be a lot easier to obtain from IANA; you know this part a lot better than I do so I'd be happy to hear your views about this. b) Ambiguous addresses are a guarantee that they will never be globally routable because the block is too small. In short, I think that if there was a /32 allocated to private addressing, that is strongly labeled "do NOT route on the public Internet", we might find that most networks administrators could not care less about site-locals. In order not to make this RFC1918-bis, we also need a mention that strongly states that these addresses are not to communicate with the public Internet in any form or fashion; read my lips: no NAT. Michel. -------------------------------------------------------------------- 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] --------------------------------------------------------------------
