[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: Draft IPv6 Minutes from Atlanta IETF



Brian E Carpenter wrote:
> Markku Savela wrote:
> 
> ...
> > Even if IPv6 is enabled, the system administrator WILL not 
> give global 
> > addresses to the internal nodes anyways. If site locals are not 
> > available, they invent something else for the purpose.
> 
> Access control lists in routers were in use for this years 
> before RFC 1597. Preventing unwanted access has never been a 
> valid argument for private addresses and never will be.

Let's try to be very crisp with the terms we are using. Private
addresses are exactly about preventing unwanted access. I believe your
intent was to say they are not an argument for ambiguous addresses. 

In the case of self controlled filters I would agree that the ambiguity
of the address is of limited value. In the case where a third party is
also responsible for some of that filtering, there is value in having
the world know to also filter.

Tony


--------------------------------------------------------------------
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 majordomo@sunroof.eng.sun.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------