RE: Naming and site-local addresses

2002-11-10 Thread Harald Tveit Alvestrand
--On søndag, november 10, 2002 17:15:16 -0800 Michel Py <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Harald, Harald Tveit Alvestrand This seems to lead me to one of two conclusions: - Address lookup is significantly more complex in the presence of site-local than if only global-scoped addresses are used - I mi

Address allocation schemes (Re: Naming and site-local)

2002-11-10 Thread Harald Tveit Alvestrand
--On søndag, november 10, 2002 15:25:56 -0500 Dan Lanciani <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: As long as we are stuck with a totally non-scalable address allocation system (remember, provider-based aggregated addressing consumes address space *exponentially* in the number of providers in the service ch

RE: A few comments on Site-Local Useage

2002-11-10 Thread Mark Smith
I have no experience with BGP confederations, so I could easily be wrong, however I was under the impression that the idea that BGP confederations was to reduce the number of iBGP sessions (ie avoid the full mesh iBGP problem), not so much address aggregation itself. If this is the case, I think t

RE: A few comments on Site-Local Useage

2002-11-10 Thread Michel Py
> Mark Smith wrote: > Could it be argued that if there was a need for confederations > in BGP to handle iBGP scaling, then there would a reason for > site-locals to be carried by BGP, presuming a single instance > of site-local addressing across the organisation ? I don't think so. Although it is

Re: Scoping Scoped Addresses

2002-11-10 Thread Keith Moore
> > Keith Moore wrote: > > *of course* the government is full of it. this is news? > > I'm sure it's so full of it that they will be happy to remove the part > of your salary that comes from government funds. I will make a pleasure > to forward your opinions to the appropriate persons. Our respo

RE: Scoping Scoped Addresses

2002-11-10 Thread Michel Py
> Keith Moore wrote: > *of course* the government is full of it. this is news? I'm sure it's so full of it that they will be happy to remove the part of your salary that comes from government funds. I will make a pleasure to forward your opinions to the appropriate persons. Michel. --

Re: Scoping Scoped Addresses

2002-11-10 Thread Keith Moore
> Very Good. The next time there is a $50 M government contract, you can > go see these guys and tell them their requirements are full of it. *of course* the government is full of it. this is news? but IETF's job is to design sound protocols and recommend sound practices, not to do whatever so

RE: Naming and site-local addresses

2002-11-10 Thread Michel Py
Harald, Harald Tveit Alvestrand > This seems to lead me to one of two conclusions: > - Address lookup is significantly more complex in the > presence of site-local than if only global-scoped > addresses are used > - I missed something. I think you missed the fact the dual-headed DNS you mentioned

RE: Scoping Scoped Addresses

2002-11-10 Thread Michel Py
>> Michel Py wrote: >> This ignores the fact that many people will use site-locals >> because addresses that are not publicly routable are a >> requirement, and this regardless of the fact they have a >> stable global prefix or not. Besides, stable global prefixes >> do not exist today for end-site

RE: question regarding possible use of SLs in renumbering

2002-11-10 Thread Michel Py
> Mark Smith wrote: > Does IPsec VPN tunnels / logical links influence any of > the current site-local discussions ? As you mentioned in your post, the VPN tunnel keeps the network convex as it's no different than any other link, and only one site is needed. Any serious network that does not have

Re: SUMMARY: RE: Limiting the Use of Site-Local

2002-11-10 Thread Kurt Erik Lindqvist
I don't see how this could reach consensus. It appears to me that way too many people here have forgot The Golden Rule of a successful product, which is to keep the customer happy. IPv6 is a product, it its success is a lot more tied to what customers (read: network administrators) think than to wh

Re: Naming and site-local addresses

2002-11-10 Thread Dan Lanciani
Harald Tveit Alvestrand <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: |This seems to lead me to one of two conclusions: | |- Address lookup is significantly more complex in the presence of |site-local than if only global-scoped addresses are used | |- I missed something. | |Comments? I don't think you missed somet

Re: Naming and site-local addresses

2002-11-10 Thread Keith Moore
> This seems to lead me to one of two conclusions: > > - Address lookup is significantly more complex in the presence of > site-local than if only global-scoped addresses are used > > - I missed something. I concur with the first conclusion. But the problem is not limited to name-to-address lo

Naming and site-local addresses

2002-11-10 Thread Harald Tveit Alvestrand
Forgive me if I am treading well-trodden paths here, but I am trying to understand It seems to me that using site-local addresses in applications means that applications have to get hold of these addresses somehow; very few applications are fed addresses directly by their users. 99% of app