At 03:46 PM 6/6/2003 -0700, Bob Hinden wrote:
I still have a small preference preference for using FC00::/7 for the globally unique local addresses due to the larger global ID, instead of reusing the FEC0::/10 prefix. But either would work.
The problem with using FECO::/10 for these addresses is that there are implementations that include special semantics to handle the ambiguity of FECO::/10 addresses, such as requiring a Zone ID to disambiguate FECO::/10 addresses, setting up separate routing tables for separate FECO::/10 zones, etc.
In Bob's proposal, addresses are globally unique (although they may not be globally routed), so we don't need special semantics to handle the ambiguity.
Margaret
-------------------------------------------------------------------- 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] --------------------------------------------------------------------
