Andrew, > Andrew White wrote: > This is why I find the idea of generating an entire > /64 prefix per subnet without needing ANY interaction > beyond the router so attractive. Why should humans be > doing work that the routers can do themselves?
We are not talking about each individual subnet, but about the initial /48 that would seed the subnets. Be realistic: zero configuration does not exist. When you take the router out of the box, you will get into it to change the default password and put your domain name in. Don't tell me that typing a SL prefix at the same time is much of an administrative overhead. I'm not too hot about zeroconf for site-locals. As several other persons contributed, we should not make site-locals too easy. Zeroconf for global prefixes, great. That being said, I do see a need for SL autoconfiguration. There is enough room in FEC0::/10 to have both a range for random/hash autoconfiguration *and* one or more ranges for people that want truly unique prefixes. When initially configuring the site-local prefix, the user must have the choice of: 1. Manual entry. 2. Contact prefix serving service (Charlie's style). 3. Autoconfig with hash/random. Looks better? 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] --------------------------------------------------------------------
