even the word "local" might be too much. it is not out of the question
for networks from all over the world to agree to exchange traffic using
GUPIs and/or PUPIs.
Local might still be OK, if you think that the addresses have 'local' relevance
not global relevance. One possible meaning of local is:
Not broad or general; not widespread: such as 'local outbreaks of flu.'
In that sense, I am happy with the term local, at least until someone proposes
something better.
it would really seem odd to me to use a "local address" to talk to a host that is halfway across the world.
that, and I'm concerned that people will think that "local" means, or is intended for, only the portion of the network that uses that same prefix - and/or that it's reasonable to expect traffic to be filtered at the edges of that portion of the network.
-------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
