Re: FW: IPv6 w.g. Last Call on "Link Scoped IPv6 Multicast Addresses"

[Jerome Durand <jdurand@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi

I don't get:

   1°) The need for such link-local adresses. Maybe it should be 
described in the document (saying you will not need any allocation 
server or equivalent is not enough I think). What type of applications 
you think will need these link-local adresses?

   2°) Why to use the flag bit P for these adresses. This bit is already 
clearly defined in the RFC 3306. I don't see the interest in having an 
exception for this RFC if scope <= 2. We already have a lot of 
complexity for IPv6 multicast adresses and poor usage. I would prefer we 
have one way to allocate the adresses and that people can implement it 
easily.

Could you please clarify these points ?

Regards

Jerome


--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
ipv6@ietf.org
Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------