On Sun, 20 Apr 2003 04:22:20 +0700 Robert Elz <kre@munnari.OZ.AU> wrote: > Date: Sat, 19 Apr 2003 16:59:21 -0400 > From: Keith Moore <moore@cs.utk.edu> > Message-ID: <20030419165921.782a8353.moore@cs.utk.edu> > > | 1918 addresses were created because there was a need for isolated > | networks to be able to get address space, and having them pick space > | at random was believed to be problematic. > > Yes, and nothing has changed. wrong. we know now that 1918 addresses created a big mess. and nothing about IPv6 use of SLs reduces that mess. > If you (and/or the WG as a whole) can come up with a replacement that is > better than site local, and meets the objectives, that's fine. Until then > don't destroy what we have now, which works now (as in, in in day to day use > now). no, you have it backwards. SLs destroy the utility of IPv6.