ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: site local addresses (was Re: Fw: Welcome to the InterNAT...)

2003-03-26 17:18:34
Michel,
        I don't think something needs to be provider independent
to fit this bill.  Getting a slice of the global address space from
some provider and choosing not route a portion of it (even
if that portion is 100%) seems to me to create "non-routed
globally unique space".  Are you concerned that doing so
has some impact on the routing system that needs to be
considered?
        Money and other annoyances are certainly concerns we
all face. In that spirit please understand that keeping site local costs
different money and creates different annoyances.
                                regards,
                                                Ted


On Wednesday, March 26, 2003, at 03:51 PM, Michel Py wrote:

Ted Hardie wrote:
I think we then to consider whether the current need
is for: "non-routed globally unique space" or for
something else.  If the answer is "non-routed globally
unique space", then the follow-on question is "Why not
get globally unique space and simply decide not to
route it?".

Because such thing does not exist, it's called PI and is not available
to IPv6 end-sites. And if it ever is, it will cost money or other
annoyances to obtain.

Michel.