> Mark Smith wrote: > Are we happy with the existing problem definition, that > (near) globally unique site local addressing is a better > solution for than traditional site-local addressing,
I think yes, but only if we address the unreachability / not-publicly-routable issue at the same time. > have the recent discussions on near globally unique site > local addressing / GUPIs caused us to inadvertently loose > focus on our problem definition, making it necessary for > us to restate and redefine it ? I think the problem definition is to get rid of ambiguity for site-local addresses. Whether it leads to almost unique, completely unique, or a mix of both is debatable. 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] --------------------------------------------------------------------
