On Thu, 23 Jun 2005 17:01:26 +0100 Tim Chown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 24, 2005 at 12:23:17AM +0930, Mark Smith wrote: > > > > I'd think ULAs and globals deployed in parallel would be the most common > > case, so I'd think it should just work "out of the box" without having > > to tweak anything. Without putting a bit of effort into it i.e. off the > > top of my head, I can't think of scenarios where ULAs wouldn't be > > deployed in parallel with globals. > > There is the intermittently connected network, that uses ULAs internally, > but will also use globals when connected externally and multi-addressed, > but then drop back to ULA-only when its uplink disappears again. > > An example might be a community wireless network, where ADSL uplinks may be > advertised and removed over time. > I agree, "deployed" was probably the wrong word to use. Regards, Mark. -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list [email protected] Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
