Agree, sounds good.   Mark's other points are also good.

Tim

On Wed, May 26, 2004 at 02:46:28PM +0200, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
> I quite like "address domain." It is self-referential, since
> we will end up saying that unique local addresses are only valid
> within the domain within which an administrator decides that they
> are valid, but that is in fact all that we *can* say.
> 
>    Brian
> 
> Mark Smith wrote:
> >Hi Bob, Brian,
> >
> >I recently read through 
> >
> >draft-ietf-ipv6-deprecate-site-local-03.txt
> >
> >and
> >
> >draft-ietf-ipv6-unique-local-addr-04.txt 
> >
> >to catch up with what was happening on the topic of site locals /
> >unique local addresses.
> >
> >It was the first time I'd read
> >draft-ietf-ipv6-deprecate-site-local-03.txt. I found it to be a
> >good explanation of the issues that site local addresses, and
> >more broadly, the issues overlapping address spaces cause.
> >
> >One of the criticisms it points out was the disagreement about
> >what the word "site" means.
> >
> >I then re-read draft-ietf-ipv6-unique-local-addr-04.txt. What
> >struck me about this draft is that it seems to quite often use
> >the word "site" in just as fuzzy way that
> >draft-ietf-ipv6-deprecate-site-local-03.txt criticises. 
> >
> >For example, I find that the use of the word "site" in the
> >characteristics list part of the Introduction really starts to
> >imply the limitation that these addresses can only be used for
> >addressing geographical sites, as to me, the word "site" has a
> >default geographical connotation.
> >
> >I'd like to suggest the use of the more generic term "address
> >domain" as an alternative to the use of "site" in
> >draft-ietf-ipv6-unique-local-addr-04.txt.
> >
> >As "address domain" is a more generic term, I think there would
> >also be some value adding some text giving examples of different
> >sizes or types of "address domains". A geographic site would be
> >one example. A mobile Personal Area Network (eg. a bluetooth /
> >wireless enabled mobile/cell phone) could be another.
> >
> >Some alternatives to "address domain" might be "address area",
> >"address group" or "address zone". I think each of these terms
> >can be used to describe a set of devices that are sharing a
> >common unique local address prefix, without implying any specific
> >range or size or number.
> >
> >The bluetooth enabled phone with a camera scenario is what caused
> >me to think about this. I recently witnessed a photograph being
> >sent between two of these phones, just using bluetooth, without
> >any carrier or carrier addressing involved (well, I don't know
> >all that much about bluetooth, I'm presuming that phones have
> >bluetooth addresses assigned in the factory, rather than via the
> >carrier). Thinking about how that could be achieved using IPv6
> >over bluetooth (or some other wireless technology), I'd think
> >unique local addressing would be the solution.  Using the
> >word "site" in this context, when discussion unique local
> >addressing and mobile phone users, would seem a bit silly to me
> >:-)
> >
> >Regards,
> >Mark.
> >
> >
> >
> >--------------------------------------------------------------------
> >IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
> >[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
> >--------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
> --------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply via email to