On Wed, 2003-04-02 at 03:41, Brian E Carpenter wrote: > As I already said under another subject line, > what I understood we were deprecating is SL as defined > in the current address architecture, i.e. FEC0::/10.
Do you mean the e-mail where you said the following? --> I prefer to think about this the other way round: kill the ambiguous --> space, which we have learnt the hard way is a mistake, and then --> design the alternative, which may well be unrouteable GUPI (and for --> all I care, starts with FEC::/10). > That's the only formal definition of SL, so I don't see > what else we could be referring to. Well, I'm still confused. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Steven L. Blake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Ericsson IP Infrastructure +1 919-472-9913 -------------------------------------------------------------------- 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] --------------------------------------------------------------------
