> >Yes, it is reasonable to assume that a /48 global prefix corresponds to > >a site-local scope. I wouldn't rule out other arrangements but I think > >this will be the common situation. > > Not necessarily. > > The issues with global vs. site-local routing in a "site" that > had multiple locations connected by leased lines were dismissed, > because the multiple locations should be more than one "site". > But, even if Wind River would be forced to have 20-something > sites by this rule, we would still probably only have a single > /48 prefix.
this is the sort of thing I was getting at. I have to conclude that using SLs in a renumbering protocol has marginal utility at best. Keith -------------------------------------------------------------------- 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] --------------------------------------------------------------------
