Brian E Carpenter writes:
> Zefram wrote:
> ...
> > I'm expecting, by the way, that the deprecation will leave fec0::/10
> > to be treated as global-scope unicast addresses, rather than making
> > fec0::/10 addresses cease to function altogether.
>
> That's an interesting expectation. As co-author of the planned
> deprecation draft, I'd been assuming a more classical deprecation
> action, in which we would simply state the previous semantics of
> FEC0::/10, state that the prefix SHOULD NOT be used, but leave it
> permanently assigned by IANA.
>
> This would break nothing that runs today.
>
> What do people think?
If you truly want to deprecate FECO::/10, I'd say
that it shouldn't be reserved to IANA, but given
to registries with explicit mandate to allocate
it immediately.
:-)/2
Mike
--------------------------------------------------------------------
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]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
