Take the case of a 20,000 node network where half are allowed global
access and half are not. It is much more complex to sort through a
10,000 node list per packet for access filtering than it would be to
have two entries, SL deny & PA allow. Yes the list of which 10,000 nodes
are allowed the global prefix has to be maintained, but it can be
applied according to allocation policy rather than per packet
processing.
How are you planning to configure and organize these 20,000 nodes?

If the private nodes are randomly distributed around the network,
I certainly think that I'd rather configure an access list with
10,000 addresses and run autoconfiguration, then configure an
access list with one prefix and have to support DHCP or manual
configuration for all 20,000 nodes, but YMMV.

If the private nodes are organized into private and public
subnets, so that you could use autoconfiguration with site-local
addresses on some networks and global addresses on others, then
why would you need site-locals for that?  You could just advertise
two different global prefixes, and filter one of them...

Margaret


--------------------------------------------------------------------
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