Michel Py wrote: > > > 2. Make these addresses not globally routable, not only by decree but by > requiring them being blocked by default and also BGP routes for this > range being rejected by default. Ambiguity is somehow a guarantee that > these addresses are not publicly routable. If we remove ambiguity, we > need to provide something instead to address this.
It would be really nice if the "not globally routable" property was by some mechanism stronger than blocked by decree. AFter all we no that RFC1918 addresses do get routed sometimes by mistake, but you can't route back to them because of the ambiguity. This may be too difficult but it could be worth thinking about for a little bit. One idea I had (with lots of problems) would be to allocate them with prefixes too large to be handled by EGPs. > > Bob Hinden and I have contributed some interesting suggestions about > this earlier, but they were lost in the email volume. If my memory is > correct, Bill Manning was the only one to pick it; Bill, I would like > more of your comments. > Yes they got lost in the volume. Please repeat them on this thread. Richard. -------------------------------------------------------------------- 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] --------------------------------------------------------------------
