Thus spake "Keith Moore" <moore@cs.utk.edu> > being able to distinguish an ambiguous address from a global address > doesn't solve the problem of requiring hosts or apps to be aware of > topology in order to make address selection. A host/app needs to be similarly aware of topology (and security policy) to make any reasonable selection between multiple global addresses. Adding non-globals to the mix doesn't make things significantly worse. > > Yes, we need to complete the work on making the 38 bits globally > > unique, but that can't happen if we start by eliminating the first 10. > > If we can agree on how to make the first 48 bits globally unique, does > it really matter what values are assigned to the first 10 bits? Yes, it does. Having a common prefix for non-global addresses makes the job of network managers much simpler, and thus reduces the likelihood of leaks. Does it need to be a 10-bit prefix? Not really, but FEC0::/10 is already there. > (yes, GUPIs, NOT SLs. they WILL be routed between sites, for good > reasons, and we shouldn't try to stop this) Since this is the first time I've seen "GUPI" used, should I assume that means a globally unique provider-independent prefix which isn't globally routed? If so, I think you're using that term in the same sense Tony uses SL. S Stephen Sprunk "God does not play dice." --Albert Einstein CCIE #3723 "God is an inveterate gambler, and He throws the K5SSS dice at every possible opportunity." --Stephen Hawking