This would seem to be pretty much the definition of "local scope".
Thus, the inability of a system to use a local scope ID outside of the scope of that ID is implicit in the definition of "local scope", and in my mind is not a limitation specific to ILNP. As I understand it, ILNP *allows* use of local scope identifiers, but does not require that anyone ever actually use local scope identifiers. Ross -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Tony Li Sent: Monday, July 26, 2010 5:34 PM To: Ran Atkinson Cc: IRTF Routing RG Subject: Re: [rrg] ILNPv6 Mobility On Jul 26, 2010, at 4:36 AM, Ran Atkinson wrote: > Earlier, Tony Li wrote: > % ILNP does not provide mobility support for locally unique IDs. > > That is a confusion. Indeed. Suppose a node with local-scope ID wishes to roam outside of its scope? How does that work? My understanding is that it needs to change its ID. Tony _______________________________________________ rrg mailing list [email protected] http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg _______________________________________________ rrg mailing list [email protected] http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg
