> We think that this use of site-local addressing is fully legitimate here.
I think it's an interesting and possibly valid case. However, I haven't seen yet why it wouldn't also work to have a global prefix for use by that wireless network and another global prefix to be provided by the external service provider. Indeed, this is very similar to the scenario I've been describing where a private network isn't directly connected to the public network by itself, but does have connections to other networks that are connected to the public network. I do see is that if you use SLs then the "right" prefix is much more likely to be used whenever a node is talking to an external host. But this also assumes that you don't have many applications that use both local-to-local communications (presumably using SL addresses) and local-to-external communications (using globals). Metro area addressing would appear to be an even better solution. 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] --------------------------------------------------------------------
