Re: Fourth alternative [was Re: Moving forward ....]

[Ralph Droms <rdroms@xxxxxxxxx>]

Bob,

Thanks for the clarification.  I think I misunderstood "not replace
site-local addresses in any form".  If I have it right, the phrase implies
"explicitly do not consider any alternatives", to which I agree that
accepting <draft-hinden-ipv6-global-local-addr-02.txt> indicates that the WG
is interested in considering alternatives.

- Ralph

At 09:15 PM 8/4/2003 -0700, Bob Hinden wrote:
>Ralph,
>
>>Furthermore, based on the record of the question from the minutes of the SF
>>meeting and the question put to the ipng mailing list, how was this
>>conclusion arrived at:
>>
>>>A fourth alternative is to not replace site-local addresses in any form, 
>>>but I think the working group has made it clear that this is not a 
>>>reasonable alternative.
>
>It's from my reading of the discussion (on the mailing list and in the 
>meetings) and the fact that the working group decided to accept 
><draft-hinden-ipv6-global-local-addr-02.txt> as a working group document 
>in Vienna.
>
>Bob
>

--------------------------------------------------------------------
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
--------------------------------------------------------------------