Subject: Re: what is a site???

From: "Steven M. Bellovin" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 25 Mar 2001 09:23:55 -0500

In message <[email-masked]>, Robert Elz writes:
>    Date:        Fri, 23 Mar 2001 20:08:43 -0800
>    From:        Steve Deering <[email-masked]>
>    Message-ID:  <v04220802b6e1c6d1bdbb@[10.83.97.214]>
>
>  | I have a hunch that you, and probably many others, will still find this
>  | description less than satisfying, preferring a simple, concrete rule for
>  | defining a site, but perhaps you can at least get a glimmer of the
>  | general notion that has been mostly buried in my mind and inadequately
>  | documented so far.
>
>I find it less than satisfying, but not for that reason, in fact, for
>exactly the opposite reason, that definition is far too precise.
>
>A site should be whatever I want it to be.   About the only requirement
>should be that it is internally connected (somehow, including using tunnels).
>
>No more than that is needed - it is just a collection of nodes that the
>administrator defines are a site, and then configures the routers at the
>borders of the collection of nodes to mark them as site boundary routers.

Yah.  I tend to equate "site" with "AS".

		--Steve Bellovin, http://www.research.att.com/~smb

--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List
IPng Home Page:                      http://playground.sun.com/ipng
FTP archive:                      ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng
Direct all administrative requests to [email-masked]
--------------------------------------------------------------------

---

From: "JIM FLEMING" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 25 Mar 2001 11:57:58 -0600

With IPv8, "site" is defined by the left-most 64-bits of the 128-bit IPv6
address.
Those bits are assumed to be a "SITE-ID". The easiest way to obtain a
site-id for
FREE (without paying ICANN/IETF taxes), is to use a 32-bit IPv4 address.
Microsoft supports this with the 2002:<IPv4>:0000 format, in time for the
2002 expansion of the IPv8 network, via Windows 2000 (or is it 2002 ?).

The right-most 64-bits are the persistent address. They are used to number
the
hosts/nodes/processes within the site. The SITE-ID can change, depending on
routing conditions on the IPv4 transport. The right-most 64-bits change less
often
because those are managed by the local administrator. In order to prevent
collisions
in the "management" of the right-most bits, all of the major TLD Communities
have
been allocated blocks (tax FREE) to manage**. IN-ADDR.[TLD] is used in place
of IN-ADDR.ARPA.

Using the right-most 64-bits for a managed persistent address, routes around
the IPv6 "Privacy Problem".
http://www.internetwk.com/columns/frezz100499.htm

Jim Fleming
http://www.unir.com
http://www.unir.com/images/architech.gif
http://www.unir.com/images/address.gif
http://www.unir.com/images/headers.gif
**http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/domainname/130dftmail/unir.txt
http://msdn.microsoft.com/downloads/sdks/platform/tpipv6/start.asp

----- Original Message -----
From: "Steven M. Bellovin" <[email-masked]>
To: "Robert Elz" <[email-masked]>
Cc: "Steve Deering" <[email-masked]>; "Paul Francis"
<[email-masked]>; <[email-masked]>
Sent: Sunday, March 25, 2001 8:23 AM
Subject: Re: what is a site???

---

From: Alain Durand <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 25 Mar 2001 10:49:58 -0800

>Yah.  I tend to equate "site" with "AS".

I disagree... A simple view of a site is a corporate network in a building or a
campus of buildings. Such sites will not have nor need an AS.

However, we could take anything that fit in a /48 and call this a site.
I'm not sure that it would be a good idea...

         - Alain.

---

From: Atsushi Onoe <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2001 09:30:41 +0900 (JST)

> I'm not sure that it would be a good idea...

I think it is a good idea, though it cannot be the _definition_ of the
"site".

IMHO, site-local scope will be used to protect against renumbering,
and for the networks not connected to the Internet.
For this purpose, some connected networks serapated within a single
geographic location _can_ be a <site>.  But a <site> is not limited to
be an single location.

Unlike IPv4 usage of a private address, IPv6 site cannot be nested.
So I don't think it is a good idea that you assign a <site> for a too
small piece of networks only for the reason that they are geographically
isolted.

Atsushi