Merit Network
Can't find what you're looking for? Search the Mail Archives.
  About Merit   Services   Network   Resources & Support   Network Research   News   Events   Home

Discussion Communities: Merit Network Email List Archives

North American Network Operators Group

Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Death of IPv6 Site-Local (was Re: Private port numbers?)

  • From: Crist Clark
  • Date: Thu Aug 14 20:33:14 2003

Mans Nilsson wrote:
> 
> Subject: Re: Private port numbers? Date: Thu, Aug 14, 2003 at 11:41:25AM -0700 Quoting Crist Clark (crist.clark@globalstar.com):
> >
> > Lars Higham wrote:
> > >
> > > It's a good idea, granted, but isn't this covered by IPv6 administrative
> > > scoping?
> >
> > That's the network layer, not the transport layer. IPv6 scoping has the
> > potential to be very helpful for private addressing since it's fundamentally
> > built into the protocol, as opposed to RFC1918 addresses which are just
> > kinda an afterthought. This means that, by default, vendor products should
> > DTRT with respect to scoped addresses, and administrators have more
> > effective tools.
> 
> Unless I am out hiking completely, you are talking about site-locals.
> Please don't: They are no more -- the ipv6 session at the SF IETF
> reached in-room consensus about removing them, a decision that was
> later confirmed on the mailing list.  There are people who did not
> like this, and they rather loudly try to get the decision reversed,
> but they are the minority.
> 
> Site-locals are, thank $DEITY, a thing of the past.
> 
> (OTOH, Link-locals still remain in the protocol.)

Without trying to find the mailing lists for the IPv6 working groups,
this must have been pretty recent. I just check up on RFCs every once
in a while and RFC 3513, dated April 2003, still talks about Site-Local.

RFC 3587, from this month, talks about losing Top Level Aggregators
and Next Level Aggregators, but that's something different.

I don't doubt you though, even though it's being deployed, IPv6 is far
from completely specified. The details still move around faster than
I'll be followoing. Heck, no one really has found a good way to use the
DIFSERV fields of IPv4 yet.
-- 
Crist J. Clark                               crist.clark@globalstar.com
Globalstar Communications                                (408) 933-4387

The information contained in this e-mail message is confidential,
intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above.
If the reader of this e-mail is not the intended recipient, or the
employee or agent responsible to deliver it to the intended recipient,
you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination, distribution or
copying of this communication is strictly prohibited.  If you have
received this e-mail in error, please contact postmaster@globalstar.com




Discussion Communities


About Merit | Services | Network | Resources & Support | Network Research
News | Events | Contact | Site Map | Merit Network Home


Merit Network, Inc.