> In my memory, > IPv6 guys also agreed on our view during the 54th IETF meeting. > > I think .. > RFC3306 needs allocation server of 32bit goup ID > in order to support the uniqueness in the site. > This site is identified by network prefix. > > But, > Group ID Autoconfiguration in link-scope will be valuable > without help of allocation server. > Each node in our draft allocates group ID independently.
I understand that link-scope has benefits over unicast-prefix for scope <=2. So saying "it is preferred to use ..." or "recommended" would seem ok. But saying "MUST" - meaning a prohibitation of using unicast-prefix - seems much to strong unless there are arguments that unicast-prefix is "broken" (not just "suboptimal") for those scopes. Erik -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
