Re: My Questions on Site-Locals

Julian, I think the one problem we need to avoid is What do you do when two occurrences of FEC0::0001/64 exist within a single routing domain? This is the problem created by the current SL definition when two 'sites' are united by merger or VPN and they both happen to have a subnet #1. We

Re: My Questions on Site-Locals

Brian, Am Freitag, 4. April 2003 15:14 schrieb Brian E Carpenter: What do you do when two occurrences of FEC0::0001/64 exist within a single routing domain? This is the problem created by the current SL definition when two 'sites' are united by merger or VPN and they both happen to

Re: My Questions on Site-Locals

Christian Schild (JOIN Project Team) wrote: Brian, Am Freitag, 4. April 2003 15:14 schrieb Brian E Carpenter: What do you do when two occurrences of FEC0::0001/64 exist within a single routing domain? This is the problem created by the current SL definition when two 'sites' are

Re: My Questions on Site-Locals

Hi Christian, At 03:53 PM 4/4/2003 +0200, Christian Schild (JOIN Project Team) wrote: I think it would be enough to come up with a BCP how to subdivide bits 11-48 in an intelligent way to prevent above. There were lots of ideas how this could be done on this list. We do need to define some