Hi Jinmei,
At 02:36 PM 4/2/2003 +0900, JINMEI Tatuya /
=?ISO-2022-JP?B?GyRCP0BMQEMjOkgbKEI=?= wrote:
What was the consensus, if any, on alternatives to site-locals when SL
is deprecated? In particular, which prefixes will we use for
disconnected or intermittently connected sites? I've checked
On Wed, Apr 02, 2003 at 05:06:08PM +0100, Mike Saywell wrote:
Not if the ad-hoc routing protocol assigns/negotiates one...
Note also in Mike's scenario he needs /48's to networks attached to
the community mesh, so the /10 property of a site-local is required,
and solutions which may allocate
According to the draft minutes, someone mentioned we can use arbitrary
prefixes for those purposes. That's true, but we cannot assure the
uniqueness of the arbitrary-chosen prefixes, so I don't see any
essential advantage over the existing fec0::/10 (with eliminating the
full usage).
I
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hiroki Ishibashi wrote:
SNIP
There are plenty of potential ways to achieve this some of
which include:
* get a prefix for disconnected access from a ISP.
* set up registries.
These will definitely increase the cost of owning even disconnected
From: Jeroen Massar [EMAIL PROTECTED]
If someone doesn't want/like this they can pick a random number
and use that, they still have to renumber when they interconnect
to another site or the internet.
No, when you interconnect, you just keep using your global addresses
in parallel with site
Markku Savela [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
From: Jeroen Massar [EMAIL PROTECTED]
If someone doesn't want/like this they can pick a random number
and use that, they still have to renumber when they interconnect
to another site or the internet.
No, when you interconnect, you just
Markku Savela [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
From: Jeroen Massar [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Markku Savela [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Despite claims of opposite, this combination works just fine.
Example.com: fec0::/10
Example.org: fec0::/10
Good luck in tossing the bits around
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hiroki Ishibashi wrote:
SNIP
There are plenty of potential ways to achieve this some of
which include:
* get a prefix for disconnected access from a ISP.
* set up registries.
These will definitely increase the cost of owning even
On Wed, Apr 02, 2003 at 03:37:25PM +0200, Jeroen Massar wrote:
Indeed 'just pick some random address' if you don't want to
be connected to the rest of the world. No need for SL.
Also E20 or a similar amount is peanuts compared to what it
would cost if you need to renumber your complete site.
Markku Savela [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
From: Jeroen Massar [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Global addresses, good, and where did you need a SL for again?
Well, just for fun, I keep using SL for internal connections. One
never knows when my global connection may break or change prefix, at a
On Wed, Apr 02, 2003 at 04:59:06PM +0200, Jeroen Massar wrote:
Mike Saywell wrote:
I setup an ad-hoc network using my laptop, wireless is 1 network and
wired is a second, my laptop routes between them. There is
no external connectivity and site-locals are deprecated so I pick
a random
Jeroen Massar wrote:
...
If someone doesn't want/like this they can pick a random
number and use that, they still have to renumber when they
interconnect to another site or the internet.
Renumbering in an IPv6 context means adding a prefix. Unlike IPv4 it
does not mean removing the existing
Tony Hain [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jeroen Massar wrote:
...
If someone doesn't want/like this they can pick a random
number and use that, they still have to renumber when they
interconnect to another site or the internet.
Renumbering in an IPv6 context means adding a prefix.
Before responding to the consensus call on site-local addresses, I'd
like to ask one question for clarification. (As required, I changed
the subject line).
What was the consensus, if any, on alternatives to site-locals when SL
is deprecated? In particular, which prefixes will we use for
Before responding to the consensus call on site-local addresses, I'd
like to ask one question for clarification. (As required, I changed
the subject line).
What was the consensus, if any, on alternatives to site-locals when SL
is deprecated? In particular, which
Before responding to the consensus call on site-local addresses, I'd
like to ask one question for clarification. (As required, I changed
the subject line).
What was the consensus, if any, on alternatives to site-locals when SL
is deprecated? In particular, which prefixes will we
16 matches
Mail list logo
