Eric, I can't speak for IBM's IS people, but we have been splitting Net 9 between internal and external use for many years, without spamming the entire Internet looking for printers. There is no reason we would do anything different with an IPv6 prefix. It's a simple enough matter of scoping and configuration.
On a "legal" point, the chairs promised to test the WG consensus to deprecate site local on this list. The strong consensus in the room last week isn't definitive; it's the consensus (or oetherwise) on this list that counts. Brian EricLKlein wrote: > > A company like IBM is big enough to have their own global > infrastructure and can also get a TLA as they are an ISP > for theirselves most probably. Same goes for companies like > Microsoft, Apple or non-computer related: Shell for instance. > > True, but they will want to keep the private network hardware on their > backbone seperate from the public traffic. I suppose that they could take > seveal /48's some for internal use and some for customer use. > > Call me old fassion but it seems a bit much to have that microwave with a > registered global address. -------------------------------------------------------------------- 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] --------------------------------------------------------------------
