Citerat fr�n Tony Hain <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

> > You're asking the DNS views to be in sync with the routing 
> > views. 

> Yes, a layer violation which is in wide deployment and use today. Yes
> there
> are technical issues which could be dealt with to make it work better,
> but
> those won't happen as long as the IETF DNS community refuses to step up
> to
> them.

Good solution. Lets move the problem somewhere else...

I think you are fighting a loosing battle. Even if there was something wrong 
with the way site locals were deprecated from IPv6 in terms of itty bitty 
details of procedure, do you honestly believe that bringing them "back" would 
prevent us (the site locals depreceators) from getting rid of them once again, 
by the book?

I think all that will be lost is precious time to work on a better solution 
because there is enough strong voices against site locals. Certainly enough for 
my interpretation of "rough consensus". Arguments for and against is repeating 
itself and that makes the likelihood of someone changing opinion smaller by the 
day. People are locked into their positions and in essence the consensus will 
remain IMHO. The only thing to change that is new evidence. None is appearing.

We can always bring site locals BACK into the standard at some later point if 
we realize that it actually was a good thing. But the apps people, the routing 
people, the ISP people, the edge people and a bunch of other people seems to 
think it is a very bad thing compared to living without it. 

It is much more difficult to change things once 100,000 people or a million 
people are using it compared to when 1000 people are using it. Are there 1000 
site local uses of IPv6 in the world today? 

I say, lets see if it really is a bad thing by trying to find a better solution 
and work with that for a while. If it turns out there are better solutions, 
everybody wins. If there aren't any, you were right and we bring site locals 
back into the picture and everybody wins.

IANA can sit on the necessary ranges until the end of time if required. It is 
always easier to ADD features in the future than to remove them. So lets get on 
with it.





--------------------------------------------------------------------
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