> Fred explained that ISATAP identifiers should really use the 
> global bit as well.

Hmm; not exactly what I said, but in (RFC4214, Section 6.1),
what if we were to change:

  "When the IPv4 address is known to be globally unique, the "u" bit
   (universal/local) is set to 1; otherwise, the "u" bit is set to 0."

to:

  "The "u" bit (universal/local) is set to 1 but the interface
   identifier is only known to be unique within the site, i.e.,
   it may or may not be unique on a global basis."

This would certainly ease some of the pressure Suresh may be
feeling, but would there be a backward-compatibility issue
for already-deployed implementations? (As long as the existing
implementationss treat the 'u' bit as "don't-care", there
should be no problem, right?)

Thanks - Fred
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

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

Reply via email to