> Not exactly to play devil's advocate here, but I don't think these are quite like site-locals. It seems like they're more like "ISP locals". I know that is the proposition. But if an address space is somehow set aside, we have no mechanism to enforce that only ISP use it. So we have to assume it will be used by whoever feels like it. > It was especially important to get rid of site locals in IPv6 because IPv6 was in very early stages of deployment, and any errors in its design would be magnified over time. It is also important to avoid mistakes during the transition period from IPv4 to IPv6. I understand that many actors are anxious and waiting for some kind of fix. This is a common scenario for making substantial mistakes... -- Christian Huitema _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf