Keith, > Keith Moore wrote: > sorry, I thought you were using "site-local" in a broader > sense than that which is in the these documents.
What kind of broader sense? I am sympathetic to ambiguity being a pain in the kazoo, but it does guarantee to some extend that SLs are not publicly routable. I'm all for removing ambiguity, but not at the cost of removing the lack of routability at the same time. Since you agree that FEC0::/10 should not be used for publicly routable addresses, what issues do you have with having FEC0::/10 used as globally unique, not globally routable, site-local addresses (which could be achieved now) *and* another future block for aggregatable, globally unique, globally routable addresses (which will take more time to get)? 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] --------------------------------------------------------------------
