Michel Py wrote: > > Jim, > > >>> Jim Bound wrote: > >>> If we simply say these NEVER leave the site then > >>> all is fine. Thats the bottom line. > > >> Michel Py wrote. > >> I'm ok with that. Not only never leave the site but > >> making >sure that they can't. > > > Even better yes. They "can't". > > You can't guarantee that for the Hinden/Haberman draft, which is the > reason I will not use it until we have a solution on a PI-like setup. > It's a matter of risk: If I use the Hinden/Haberman draft as private > addresses, and if it ends up being perverted as PI, my entire network > design goes to the trash. If I hijack a random prefix for private > addresses, the risk of collisions although not null is a lot less.
I am puzzled by your last two sentences. Can you be more precise about why your design would be trashed and why random hijacking is less risky than a pseudo-random generator? Brian - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Brian E Carpenter Distinguished Engineer, Internet Standards & Technology, IBM NEW ADDRESS <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> PLEASE UPDATE ADDRESS BOOK -------------------------------------------------------------------- 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] --------------------------------------------------------------------
