kre, | Tim Hartrick wrote: | Aside: When the GSE discussion was going on N years ago, I was fore | square against the /64 boundary for all the reasons that others | have brought up in this latest thread. That is, the dubious basis | for assuming that a globally unique identifier is possible, the | address space waste. etc. I lost the argument. I can live with it. | It sure would be nice if decisions made in this WG had a half-life | of longer than four years.
> kre wrote: > I'd tend to agree with you - but we've just had Thomas claim that > the reason all this remains is so GSE can be revived, sometime in > the future... I don't think that's what Thomas said. Since I probably am the one in the best position to talk about this, the current status is: - If GSE was the only way out for multihoming, I have no doubt that it would be back on the scene, despite the documented shortcomings. GSE was dismissed years ago when the collective dream that a much better multihoming solution was still there. We have since then come closer to reality. - GSE will likely not be pursued (we have talked about the possibility of reviving it three months ago and decided that we had a better mouse trap). - The perfect multihoming solution does not exist yet, and there is a general feeling that GSE is possibly unfinished, problem is that nobody has found the required breakthrough. - There is currently no use made of the 'u' bit for any current or future multihoming protocol I know of. As we have seen here in the past and more recently with support for Thomas' postings and other people contributing similar arguments, my analysis of this issue is as follows: - The 'u' bit is not a blocking reason why prefixes longer than /64 are not allowed. Regardless of the existence of the 'u' bit, there are reasons and support to keep the /64 boundary, which in turns means that there is no consensus to remove it from [addrarch]. - In the context of the /64 boundary, the existence of the 'u' bit does not bother anybody, I think. - Given the likely strong support for a "son of GSE" should it be written, it seems reasonable to leave this door open keep the 'u' bit for the time being. Michel. -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List IPng Home Page: http://playground.sun.com/ipng FTP archive: ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng Direct all administrative requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------
