Re: site local addresses

To: "Matt Crawford" <crawdad at fnal.gov>
Subject: Re: site local addresses
From: Ole Troan <ot at cisco.com>
Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2003 21:05:37 +0000
Cc: Tim Chown <tjc at ecs.soton.ac.uk>, ietf at ietf.org
In-reply-to: <200303281511.h2SFB72Y021166@gungnir.fnal.gov> ("Matt Crawford"'s message of "Fri, 28 Mar 2003 09:11:07 -0600")
References: <200303281511.h2SFB72Y021166@gungnir.fnal.gov>
Sender: owner-ietf at ietf.org
User-agent: Gnus/5.090011 (Oort Gnus v0.11) Emacs/21.2.95 (sparc-sun-solaris2.8)

>> Except of those 14 some seven(?) are RFC3041 addresses, which break a
>> number of applications... so there are some clouds in the sky.
>
> 3041 may be next on the hit-list.  Pretty soon it truly will be
> nothing but bigger addresses.

lets shoot down those 128 bit addresses too, 64 must be enough.

/ot

References:
- Re: site local addresses (was Re: Fw: Welcome to the InterNAT...)
  - From: Matt Crawford

Prev by Date: Re: site local addresses (was Re: Fw: Welcome to the InterNAT...)
Next by Date: Re: Thinking differently about the site local problem (was: RE: site local addresses (was Re: Fw: Welcome to the InterNAT...))
Previous by thread: Re: site local addresses (was Re: Fw: Welcome to the InterNAT...)
Next by thread: Re: site local addresses (was Re: Fw: Welcome to the InterNAT...)
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

Note Well: Messages sent to this mailing list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.

Re: site local addresses

Note: Messages sent to this list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.