[SNAP] I totally agree with the beginning of Tony's post. > Tony Hain wrote: > Until the WG agrees on the requirements, there is no > possibility for the group to evaluate the utility of > the current SL or other approaches.
I would go further than this and say that requirements alone are not enough to evaluate what to do WRT this issue, as requirements could be impossible to meet (as seen with multi6, for example). Requirements are good but must be complemented by looking at _solutions_ as well and as of today we don't have any solution to replace site-locals. An imperfect solution is better than no solution and until we find a better mouse trap it is harmful to deprecate the running code deployed by multiple vendors that we currently have. Michel. -------------------------------------------------------------------- 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] --------------------------------------------------------------------
