I support this suggested course of action and the proposed new text.

- Ralph

At 01:53 PM 11/12/2002 +0100, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
Unfortunately it's too late to catch the addressing architecture
document unless we recall it from the RFC Editor and cycle it
through the IESG again. But I propose that we do exactly that,
in order to change the following paragraph in section 2.5.6:

Current text:

>    Site-local addresses are designed to be used for addressing inside of
>    a site without the need for a global prefix.  Although a subnet ID
>    may be up to 54-bits long, it is expected that globally-connected
>    sites will use the same subnet IDs for site-local and global
>    prefixes.

Proposed new text:

   Site-local addresses are designed to be used for addressing inside of
   a site which is not connected to the Internet and therefore does not
   need a global prefix.  They must not be used for a site that is connected
   to the Internet. Using site-local addresses, a subnet ID may be up to
   54-bits long, but it is recommended to use at most 16-bit subnet IDs,
   for convenience if the site is later connected to the Internet using a
   global prefix.

Otherwise, we will need a whole new RFC just for this paragraph.

Alternatively, we could spend the next 5 years discussing the
unnecessary complexities of using site-locals on connected sites.

  Brian
--------------------------------------------------------------------
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]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------
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