Fred, >>> Fred L. Templin wrote >>> I also recommend that a range of IP numbers be reserved >>> for use as site-local addresses. This will prevent the >>> rogue network administrator from picking addresses from >>> the air.
Since that 2002:0A00::/24 and consorts are already available for that kind of picking, I agree that it would be better to have a known range instead of random pickings. >> Are you talking about a range other than FECO::/10? > I'd like to propose F000:/4 Wow this is big. Not to mention the difficulties of obtaining a prefix that short, I think this size would be a good fit for global PI addresses such as Tony Hain's proposal, but why would site-locals need that much? Michel. -------------------------------------------------------------------- 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] --------------------------------------------------------------------
