Tim Chown wrote: > > On Mon, Mar 31, 2003 at 09:57:25AM +0200, Brian E Carpenter wrote: > > > > When IPv6 began, it was certainly the disconnected sites argument that > > made me happy with site locals; but we hadn't thought through the scope > > issues or the issues of intermittently connected sites, and both of those > > are messy enough that I am now against site locals. > > So, as Michel asked, what's the solution for intermittently connected sites > in the absence of site locals?
Well, I'd hoped to avoid that question until we had mailing list consensus on deprecating SLs. But since you ask, I think it has to be some form of GUPI prefix, plus of course a PA prefix during periods of connection. 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] --------------------------------------------------------------------
