Kurt: First, my apologies for the delayed reply. Response inline.
AEB On Mon, 2 Dec 2002, Kurt Erik Lindqvist wrote: > > My memory of the discussions accords with the summary given by Keith > > above. In addition, the general tenor of the discussion indicated to > > me > > that the two issues were linked: that consensus on limiting site-locals > > was contingent upon initiation of an effort to design a workable scheme > > for privately-routable PIs, with the global routing of PIs left for > > subsequent discussion. > > So the remaining question besides the PI issue would be to define > "limit" then? > Perhaps my use of the term "limit" was a bit ambiguous. I intended this to refer to the proposal, agreed to at the Atlanta IETF, to restrict the use of site-local addressing to within the boundaries of the local site; specifically, to prohibit the use of site-local addressing for transport or end-system addresses for any traffic which leaves the boundary of the site. Given the concensus at IETF 55 on this matter I hadn't imagined that further definition should be necessary, but the wording of my text was admittedly less than perfectly clear. Regards, AEB > - kurtis - > Alan E. Beard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> AEBeard Consulting; 4109 Chelsa Ln; Lakeland FL 33809 863.815.2529 -------------------------------------------------------------------- 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] --------------------------------------------------------------------
