On Mon, 2 Jun 2003, Bob Hinden wrote:
> 4) The scope of these address is smaller from global unicast address but 
> larger than site-local.  They are scoped in a different manner than 
> link-local, site-local, and global in that the scope of an individual /48 
> prefix is created by a set of adhoc routing agreements and is not limited 
> by the non-uniqueness of the prefix like site-local.
> 
>  From a host's perspective this difference in scope shows up by different 
> reachability than global unicast and could be handled by default that 
> way.  It is probably better for nodes and applications to treat them 
> differently from global unicast addresses.  

I hope you're not implying that apps should know the difference between 
the two?  That would be broken.  The host probably could, though.

> A starting point might be to 
> give them preference over global unicast, but fall back to global unicast 
> if a particular destination is found to be unreachable.  Much of this 
> behavior can be controlled by how they are allocated to nodes and put into 
> the DNS. 

I think a better method would be to give preference to global unicast, 
ie., reverse the scoping rule to prefer the greatest scope.

The communication would still work if a node had only local unicast 
addresses though, or if global addresses were blocked in a firewall etc.

This is particularly important if local addresses like these are ever
getting into DNS or the like.

> However it is useful if a host can have both types of addresses 
> and use them appropriately.  This creates a host with multiple global 
> addresses, a form of multihoming.

I fail to see how a local and a global address could be considered a form 
of multihoming.
 
[snip]

> I would proposed that the IPv6 w.g. define the address format and default 
> node and application behavior, and leave the more ambitious address 
> selection solutions to multi6 or other working groups as appropriate.

Yep.

-- 
Pekka Savola                 "You each name yourselves king, yet the
Netcore Oy                    kingdom bleeds."
Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings

--------------------------------------------------------------------
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]
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply via email to