Re: site local addresses (was Re: Fw: Welcome to the InterNAT...)

[Ted Hardie <[e-mail]>]

Michel,
	I don't think something needs to be provider independent
to fit this bill.  Getting a slice of the global address space from
some provider and choosing not route a portion of it (even
if that portion is 100%) seems to me to create "non-routed
globally unique space".  Are you concerned that doing so
has some impact on the routing system that needs to be
considered?
	Money and other annoyances are certainly concerns we
all face.  In that spirit please understand that keeping site local 
costs
different money and creates different annoyances.
				regards,
						Ted


On Wednesday, March 26, 2003, at 03:51 PM, Michel Py wrote:

>> Ted Hardie wrote:
>> I think we then to consider whether the current need
>> is for: "non-routed globally unique space" or for
>> something else.  If the answer is "non-routed globally
>> unique space", then the follow-on question is "Why not
>> get globally unique space and simply decide not to
>> route it?".
>
> Because such thing does not exist, it's called PI and is not available
> to IPv6 end-sites. And if it ever is, it will cost money or other
> annoyances to obtain.
>
> Michel.
>
>