Re: IPv6 w.g. Last Call on "Unique Local IPv6 Unicast Addresses"

[Mark Smith <ipv6@c753173126e0bc8b057a22829880cf26.nosense.org>]

On Tue, 11 Nov 2003 02:29:55 -0000
matthew.ford@bt.com wrote:

> > How about simply calling whatever we end up with 
> > "organizational addresses"?
> > I think that captures it much better than "local", "site 
> > local", "private"
> > or whatever.
> 
> as others have pointed out these addresses will be used in
> non-'organisational' scenarios. therefore i prefer 'local' as it has the
> widest applicability. what is wrong with 'local'?
> 

I suppose that it tends to have implied geographical connotations if there is no qualifier as to what "local" is referring to.

Maybe "entity local IPv6 unicast addresses" ? Still slightly too generic for my mind, but possibly better than "organi[sz]ation" ?

Regards,
Mark.

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