Thus spake "Ofer Inbar" <cos(_at_)aaaaa(_dot_)org>
but I have seen nothing other than Tony's assertions that would make
me think this dicussion is about any of those things. It puzzles me that
he keeps repeating them.
Tony, *why* do you think this discussion is about reachability?
Everyone else: Do any of you believe that's what this is about, aside
from Tony's assertions and peoples responses to those assertions?
Well, I think there was some confusion while we sorted out exactly what
"scope" means, as one camp seems to define it as a reachability problem
while the other camp defines it as an identity problem.
Any time you pass locators across a "scope" boundary, using either
definition above, things break. I think we all agree on that, so the exact
definition of "scope" doesn't seem so important.
There is a related issue, which was until recently confused with the first,
and that is whether ambiguous addresses should be allowed/encouraged for
local use. It seems to be established that this is a bad idea, but unless
there is a workable mechanism to establish unique addresses for all networks
_without relying on topology_, I don't see the concept going away.
S
Stephen Sprunk "God does not play dice." --Albert Einstein
CCIE #3723 "God is an inveterate gambler, and He throws the
K5SSS dice at every possible opportunity." --Stephen Hawking