Hi, Rob, I agree with your take from the network side, I'm thinking Terry may be looking at it from the applications side (what's the difference between one perfectly lovely address that fails unpredictably and another perfectly lovely address that also fails unpredictably? and the unknowable firewall topology is probably within a first approximation of the unknowable site topology). But Terry can tell me I'm not thinking straight, if needed... Spencer --- Rob Austein <sra+ietf@hactrn.net> wrote: > At Sun, 20 Apr 2003 08:47:43 -0700 (Pacific Standard Time), > Terry Gray wrote: > > > > Also, I'm wondering how the SL/1918 address-scoping debate > plays in > > the context of firewalls. Don't firewalls provide an even > more > > random form of address scoping that apps must cope with? Or > not? > > To a first approximation, firewalls are an attempt to impose > tighter > scoping on applications that (in the opinion of the entity > operating > the firewall) cannot be trusted to make their own scope > decisions. > Very different trust relationship from a situation in which > the > applications themselves chose between multiple address scopes.