> > nope. > > Hmmm. I guess the alternative is that the purpose of ULA-C/G is to mitigate > the risk of collision when merging on the order of hundreds of thousands of > ULA networks in one routing realm... sort of like creating a "local DFZ" of > a sort. > > Forgive me, but that sounds even more surreal. ...
if you're going to cons up a potential interpretation without knowing the real answer, can you at least cons up one that makes sense to you? > Is that the big driving factor here? [EMAIL PROTECTED] has done a fine job of explaining that, today, again. -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list [email protected] Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
