\Hello Alex,
Alexandru Petrescu wrote:
Yes, we have an issue here.
Many implementers on this list have often disregarded the fact that the
LL address was there. Because of that, let us continue this complete
disregard and not say MAY LL, neither SHOULD LL, nor MUST NOT LL. Just
don't say LL - because they have always been completely disregarded -
let us have this draft reflect that particular implementer situation.
Disregarded in implementation, disregarded in the draft.
This is not responsive to the need.
But don't say wrong things about them.
This is good advice, as always.
(1) it doesn't scale to large domain,
How large do you need?
Hmmm, it can't become as big as the Internet is now.
Is that your test for utility?
(2) can't connect to the Internet,
Wrong.
Can we talk about it without going solution space?
It's mathematically proven that your statement is wrong,
by the mere existence of a counterexample.
I think we should talk about it in an addressing model draft which does
not disturb the non adhoc aware nodes (i.e. Internet nodes).
We already did.
Regards,
Charlie P.
