Keith, > > The lack of global routability of site-local addresses is a > feature, > > not a bug. > > I don't think we have concensus on that. there seem to be at > least a few people who want PI addresses that *are* > routable, or at least, for which such restrictions are not imposed. > I am just trying to understand this part. From what I can understand, the relative stability of the GUPI addresses with respect to global addresses is higher. Is that the sole reason why you would pay an ISP to route these prefixes instead of getting a global prefix from the same ISP ? What are the reasons why uou want the GUPI to be routeable ?
thanks mohan > I'm sympathetic to the concerns about routing table size and > routing computation overhead, but I'm not sure that mandatory > or even default filtering of GUPIs is the right thing in the > long term. > > 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] > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > -------------------------------------------------------------------- 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] --------------------------------------------------------------------
