Alex, > So, an idea is that the location privacy might be a problem, and that > Mobile IPv6 might offer a site-local-free solution for that problem, > and that HMIPv6 needs site locals in order to provide a solution to > that problem.
This is not a correct conclusion. As I have explained earlier, HMIP provides location privacy by hiding MN's LCoA from the CN. LCoA does not need to be site-local. You'd need site-locals if you want to replicate the IPv4-NAT architecture one-to-one in this context. But this is not needed for achiving location privacy. alper -------------------------------------------------------------------- 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] --------------------------------------------------------------------
