Brian E Carpenter writes:
> Eliot,
>
> That seems to me to be orthogonal. I agree that it would be good to see
> renumbering support (maybe it's a v6ops item??). But that doesn't destroy
> the value of Bob's proposal.
I disagree. What we seem to be dancing around with
here is an aversion to dealing with the actual
requirements of people who deploy networks. Even
though Bob's proposal polishes the site local
turd, it's still a dangerous stopgap and doesn't
address _why_ this requirement for stability in
the here and now is so strong, and the fact that
we don't have a credible answer.
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]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
