IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Thinking differently about the site local problem (was: RE: site local addresses (was Re: Fw: Welcome to the InterNAT...))

Keith Moore <moore@cs.utk.edu> Mon, 31 March 2003 21:29 UTC

Received: from ran.ietf.org (ran.ietf.org [10.27.6.60]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA25523; Mon, 31 Mar 2003 16:29:22 -0500 (EST)
Received: from majordomo by ran.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.10) id 19073e-0005HH-00 for ietf-list@ran.ietf.org; Mon, 31 Mar 2003 16:43:10 -0500
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([10.27.2.28] helo=ietf.org) by ran.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 19070U-0004ok-00 for ietf@ran.ietf.org; Mon, 31 Mar 2003 16:39:54 -0500
Received: from astro.cs.utk.edu (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA25212 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 31 Mar 2003 16:23:28 -0500 (EST)
Received: from astro.cs.utk.edu (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by astro.cs.utk.edu (cf 8.9.3) with SMTP id h2VLPmA06240; Mon, 31 Mar 2003 16:25:48 -0500 (EST)
Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2003 16:25:48 -0500
From: Keith Moore <moore@cs.utk.edu>
To: alh-ietf@tndh.net
Cc: moore@cs.utk.edu, mrw@windriver.com, huitema@windows.microsoft.com, ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: Thinking differently about the site local problem (was: RE: site local addresses (was Re: Fw: Welcome to the InterNAT...))
Message-Id: <20030331162548.08cfa4aa.moore@cs.utk.edu>
In-Reply-To: <077601c2f7be$e0fcdc70$ee1a4104@eagleswings>
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20030331124842.049a5c10@mail.windriver.com> <077601c2f7be$e0fcdc70$ee1a4104@eagleswings>
X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.8.9 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i386--netbsdelf)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-ietf@ietf.org
Precedence: bulk
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On Mon, 31 Mar 2003 11:51:10 -0800
"Tony Hain" <alh-ietf@tndh.net> wrote:

> Margaret Wasserman wrote:
> > Of course, in the case of site-local addresses, you don't 
> > know for sure that you reached the _correct_ peer, unless you 
> > know for sure that the node you want to reach is in your 
> > site.  
> 
> Since the address block is ambiguous, routing will assure that if you
> reach a node it is the correct one. This FUD needs to stop!

NO, Tony.  The addresses get passed around in other places than the IP
header, where routers cannot block it.  This isn't FUD, it's reality. 
And the disinformation needs to stop.

Keith

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email