Michel Py wrote: ... > An imperfect solution is better than no solution
Not if it's more harmful than the absence of a solution, which may well be the case in this instance (although that is a matter of judgement). > and until we find a > better mouse trap it is harmful to deprecate the running code deployed > by multiple vendors that we currently have. Until we publish a revised addressing RFC, we haven't touched running code. It is just an internal decision inside the IETF. Personally, I'd advise customers who believe they need local addresses to continue using FEC0 until the addressing architecture is revised and products catch up. Brian - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Brian E Carpenter Distinguished Engineer, Internet Standards & Technology, IBM NEW ADDRESS <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> PLEASE UPDATE ADDRESS BOOK -------------------------------------------------------------------- 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] --------------------------------------------------------------------