On donderdag, okt 9, 2003, at 19:58 Europe/Amsterdam, Bob Hinden wrote:
http://arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us/ipv6mh/metro-addr-slides-jul95.pdf
However this was never part of the spec AFAIR.
That is correct, it was never part of the IPv6 standards. I too
thought it was a nice approach.
In that c
At 10:39 AM 10/9/2003, Michel Py wrote:
> Bill Manning wrote:
> I remember them being considered. Steve Deering had
> this wonderful idea for metro-addressing.
Indeed, in 1995 when he was at parc. Here's a link:
http://arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us/ipv6mh/metro-addr-slides-jul95.pdf
However this was
> Bill Manning wrote:
> I remember them being considered. Steve Deering had
> this wonderful idea for metro-addressing.
Indeed, in 1995 when he was at parc. Here's a link:
http://arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us/ipv6mh/metro-addr-slides-jul95.pdf
However this was never part of the spec AFAIR.
Michel.
% > Brian Haberman wrote:
% > I do not recall geographic-based addresses ever being a
% > part of the IPv6 standards.
%
% I don't either.
I remember them being considered. Steve Deering had this wonderful
idea for metro-addressing.
% > Tony Hain has an individual ID that discuss
> Brian Haberman wrote:
> I do not recall geographic-based addresses ever being a
> part of the IPv6 standards.
I don't either.
> Tony Hain has an individual ID that discusses one
> possible approach (draft-hain-ipv6-pi-addr-05.txt).
Another approach based on a combination of population and geog
Eric,
I do not recall geographic-based addresses ever being a part of
the IPv6 standards. Tony Hain has an individual ID that discusses one
possible approach (draft-hain-ipv6-pi-addr-05.txt).
In addition, the geopriv working group is chartered with how
geographic location can be securel
