> Is anyone interested in pursuing this design? Well, I have an implementation.
If Bob is happy, I'd like to grab most of his text (since it's better written than mine) and wrap it around my bit-ordering proposal. > - If the /16 is well known, it can be plugged as "least preferred" in > the address selection rules. I still have qualms with this. I'm of the opinion that if site-locals exist in a network then hosts should prefer them (iff both hosts have them); the assumption is that SL addresses are at least as stable as externally sourced addresses. Of course, this policy will potentially be inappropriate for applications that do address forwarding across a site boundary, but I'd argue that these are the special case. Apps that do address forwarding NOT across a site boundary will be happy with the standard policy. -- Andrew White -------------------------------------------------------------------- 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] --------------------------------------------------------------------
