> Site-locals was voted down in the WG meeting in SF.

The IETF doesn't vote ... and there is no way a decision gets made in a
meeting. It doesn't matter that a few vocal people want to remove a
capability because they don't understand it, the rules of the IETF are
that decisions are based on mail list discussions. 

Site-locals are useful exactly for the case that started this thread,
though 6to4 from the public side of each nat would also work. They are
also useful for the intermittent connected network, because internal
connections are not dropped at every connect event. Those applications
that are concerned about the potential of breaking have a clearly
defined prefix to avoid using.

Tony




--------------------------------------------------------------------
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]
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply via email to