> > If the private nodes are organized into private and public > > subnets, so that you could use autoconfiguration with > > site-local addresses on some networks and global addresses on > > others, then why would you need site-locals for that? You > > could just advertise two different global prefixes, and > > filter one of them... > > I agree, but that requires specific topology constraints that are > unreasonable. If my laptop needs to be publicly accessable but my > printer does not, why is it reasonable to require separate network drops > rather than letting them share a hub?
who said anything about separate pieces of hardware? we've been routing multiple subnets on the same cable for ages now. Keith -------------------------------------------------------------------- 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] --------------------------------------------------------------------
