> > > What I want to know is why the concept "local" in > > > the absense of enforceability (cf strong auth) > > > isn't a thoroughly bogus concept. > > > > for the purpose of security, in any network of significant size, > > it certainly is. > > > > if site-locals are useful at all it is not because of security. > > Well then, I guess I'm at a loss about why people would > want to use site-locals for local services. If it's not > for the possibility of access control, then what else > is it?
valid use cases appear to be: - for use in isolated networks (not connected to _any_ other network) - local addresses that are stable across renumbering - addresses for intermittently-connected networks lacking a stable global prefix 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] --------------------------------------------------------------------
