(BCC: 6man mailing list, which is where this document is intended to become a work item)
On Jul 11, 2013, at 10:14 PM 7/11/13, Michael Richardson <mcr+i...@sandelman.ca> wrote: > >> The most recent rev of draft-droms-6man-multicast-scopes defines scope >> 0x03 as: > >> 3 Network-Specific scope, greater than Link-Local scope, defined >> automatically from the network topology > >> To be confirmed: will this definition suffice for MPL? > > I think it is sufficient, because we understand what it means. > I am concerned about the word "Network"... which could mean anything to > anyone. > > I'd think that the right word would be "subnet", because the intent is that > it is for the entire /64 or whatever it is that one is using. I think that > is the term that is used in RFC4291. "subnet" implies that this multicast scope must derive from the address assignment topology. The first (and only) use case is derived from the /64 prefix; do we want to have that limitation for all uses of scope 0x03? - Ralph > > -- > ] Never tell me the odds! | ipv6 mesh networks [ > ] Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works | network architect [ > ] m...@sandelman.ca http://www.sandelman.ca/ | ruby on rails > [ > > > > -- > Michael Richardson <mcr+i...@sandelman.ca>, Sandelman Software Works > > > _______________________________________________ > Roll mailing list > r...@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/roll -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
