Hans,
The "application" is wireless connectivity to network XYZ, where the
network manager of network XYZ controls the choise of the address space
used. Multi-access basically stands for simultaneous access to multiple
different networks, possibly under different administration. I.e., the
terminal is effectively a host participating in multiple sites at the
same time. Since we can't control the network managers, we simply have
to assume that some of them will choose to use limited range addressing.
MikaL
On Thu, 2003-08-07 at 22:25, Hans Kruse wrote:
> that application seems to scream for "real", i.e. provider-assigned
> globally unique addresses -- I don't think this is where limited range
> ("local") addresses should be used?
>
> --On Thursday, August 07, 2003 20:09 +0300 Mika Liljeberg
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > I've been working on implementing IPv6 for multi-access capable cell
> > phones. The number game gets rather different if you start with the
> > assumption of maybe 1 billion multi-access terminals deployed world-wide
> > within the next few years. This quickly leads to the conclusion that
> > anything not guaranteed to be unique must be treated as ambiguous.
> > Unless uniqueness can be guaranteed, I don't see a way around the
> > requirement of having a fully scoped IPv6 implementation in these
> > terminals. Any host operating system that tries to enable users to take
> > full advantage of wireless connectivity will be faced with the same
> > dilemma. Ditto application developers.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
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]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
