YES -- Deprecate site-local unicast addressing
Increases application complexity.
Reduces application reliability.
Requires too many compensating hacks to other protocols.Note: By "Deprecate Site-Local", I mean "Do not require any application, host, router, protocol or IETF practice to have to make special consideration for the idea that an IPv6 unicast address outside of the link-local range can refer to two different hosts".
In particular, that the drawings in draft-ietf-ipngwg-scoping-arch-04.txt showing zone indices need never have more than 2 levels (interface-local and link-local), that all 70 references to "site" in this document can be removed, and that section 12 of that draft (textual representation of zone-ids) can be removed, or reworded to deal with debugging tools for link-local only.
By "Deprecate", I do not mean "Allocate the FEC0::/10 prefix to the RIRs for normal allocations". That would be stupid.
Harald
-------------------------------------------------------------------- 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] --------------------------------------------------------------------
