EricLKlein wrote: > > >> Say that both networks were using the FE8::xxxx:xxxx network, > >> then one of them could change this to FE9::xxxx:xxxx prior to the merge, > >> and then just link them. > >> > >> Should be a piece of cake. An alternative would be simply to > >> go from both being FE8::xxxx:xxxx to one being FE8:1::xxxx:xxxx and > >> the other being FE8:2::xxxx:xxxx This way there would be the ability > >>of > >> splitting sites and such by the thousands, and only using NAT for the > >> public Internet connections.
Regardless of the other comments made on this, it would be even simpler if both sites were using global address space. You could unite them straightforwardly using OSPF and you wouldn't need NAT. (You would need to unite the firewall rules as well, in any case.) Of course, this assumes multi6 comes up with a solution, but that is another discussion on another list. Brian -------------------------------------------------------------------- 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] --------------------------------------------------------------------
