Subject: RE: exclusive model [RE: site-locals]

From: "Michel Py" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2003 09:33:26 -0800

Pekka,

> Pekka Savola wrote:
> but it depends on certain things (like site-border routers)
> that are unacceptable.  The proposal doesn't seem to be be
> workable in practise, IMHO.

This is speculation, also called FUD and does not lead to making
progress.

> I'm not personally that much opposed to the limited model,
> and could maybe even live with exclusive model

This is the real deal: I am myself favorable to the moderate model, but
I could leave with the exclusive model. We are talking about what could
reach consensus here, not about what everybody would like to have.

From my chair, the model that could reach consensus is the exclusive
model. It's a compromise, and as such nobody likes it but it also means
that it is something that everybody could live with.

Michel.

--------------------------------------------------------------------
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: Pekka Savola <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2003 20:40:34 +0300 (EEST)

> This is speculation, also called FUD and does not lead to making

I'll show you it's not FUD when/if the I-D comes out if you don't believe
it before.

Exclusive model creates certain very disturbing problems in hosts (wrt.  
oscillation between global and site-local) which might be fixable, and
ones even more so in the routers (requiring quite extensive site-local
implementation) which is unlikely to go away.

--
Pekka Savola                 "You each name yourselves king, yet the
Netcore Oy                    kingdom bleeds."
Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings