> 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.
i will not make sarcastic remarks. i will not make sarcastic remarks. i will not make sarcastic remarks. i will not make sarcastic remarks. i will not make sarcastic remarks. i will not make sarcastic remarks. i will not make sarcastic remarks. :-) if there is real consensus on this, processwise it could be done with a note to the rfc editor or in the 48 hour edit call as s/he is doing the final edits. randy -------------------------------------------------------------------- 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] --------------------------------------------------------------------
