On Tue, 2 Mar 2004, Myung-Ki Shin wrote: > > SSM range is FF3X::/32. This draft invades in that territory. > > No, as mentioned before, > SSM format is FF3X::/96 in section 7 of RFC 3306. > Thus, it is distinguishable.
Sorry, SSM WG does not agree with this interpretation. > So, which one is correct ? (FF3X::/32 or FF3X::/96) > We shoud ask it to the authors of RFC 3306. The current belief among SSM people is that to identify an SSM address, the implementations check for FF3X::/32, even though currently only FF3X::/96 is being used. -- Pekka Savola "You each name yourselves king, yet the Netcore Oy kingdom bleeds." Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
