Hi John,
What is the amount of work to depreciate site locals - how many RFCs need to be updated? I'm not convinced that deprecating site locals really solves anything.
The work to keep, and finish, site-locals is much greater than the work to deprecate them.
To deprecate them, I think that the addressing architecture and the default address selection rules would be the only RFCs (both at PS) that we need to change.
To keep them, we need to document and resolve the issues that they cause, update all of the IPv6 routing protocols to document how site-boundaries are maintained, and document how address selection will be performed in several upper layer protocols (at least SCTP, SIP and FTP). We might also need to provide guidance to non-IETF applications protocol developers and/or application developers for how to handle site-local addresses in non-IETF applications. And, we'd need to specify split DNS.
Margaret
-------------------------------------------------------------------- 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] --------------------------------------------------------------------
