Keith Moore wrote: > > > Since IPv6 prefixes are going to be mapped along the same > > > boundaries as IPv4 prefixes ie., layer 2 broadcast domains, > > > IPv6 route filtering in an government network will be just as > > > dull a tool as it is in IPv4. > > > > This shows IPv4 thinking, where the network has a single > prefix / L2. > > While I agree the initial deployments will likely mirror the IPv4 > > network, there is no reason to preclude having additional > prefixes / > > L2, where the reachability characteristics are different. > > ...except that apps won't have any way of knowing which > prefixes to use for which purposes. >
Only due to the refusal to accept that hinden/haberman prefixes would provide a clue, and those used with the bellovin/zill RA provide a clear indication to any app that cares to look. Tony -------------------------------------------------------------------- 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] --------------------------------------------------------------------
