IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

"Jeroen Massar" <jeroen@unfix.org> Thu, 03 April 2003 12:17 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 HAA17070; Thu, 3 Apr 2003 07:17:53 -0500 (EST)
Received: from majordomo by ran.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.10) id 1913nf-00059I-00 for ietf-list@ran.ietf.org; Thu, 03 Apr 2003 07:26:35 -0500
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([10.27.2.28] helo=ietf.org) by ran.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 1913n2-000584-00 for ietf@ran.ietf.org; Thu, 03 Apr 2003 07:25:56 -0500
Received: from purgatory.unfix.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA16830 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 3 Apr 2003 07:08:52 -0500 (EST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by purgatory.unfix.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C1DC8992; Thu, 3 Apr 2003 14:11:17 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from limbo (limbo.unfix.org [10.100.13.33]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-MD5 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by purgatory.unfix.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E3C678B2; Thu, 3 Apr 2003 14:11:12 +0200 (CEST)
From: Jeroen Massar <jeroen@unfix.org>
To: 'John Stracke' <jstracke@centive.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...))
Date: Thu, 03 Apr 2003 14:12:22 +0200
Organization: Unfix
Message-ID: <004f01c2f9da$48370fb0$210d640a@unfix.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.3416
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
In-Reply-To: <3E8B35B1.7030906@centive.com>
X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS @ purgatory.unfix.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-ietf@ietf.org
Precedence: bulk
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

John Stracke wrote:
> Jeroen Massar wrote:
> 
> >>Ad-hoc networks are another similar case, where two machines 
> >>are connected via ad-hoc wireless, bluetooth, firewire,
> >>or similar.
> >>    
> >>
> >In any other way do you like remembering and typing over 128bit
> >addresses?? :)
> >
> :: is your friend.  If you're building an ad hoc, point-to-point 
> network, you can pick convenient addresses.

:: as in all 0's which corresponds to 'not bound'?
I don't see how you are going to communicate between
two hosts with a unbound IP. Especially in a ad-hoc
network where everything should be configured automatically.

> >Most OS's require a (unique) hostname to be entered/automatically
> >generated on install
> >
> False.

And is there any reasoned argument instead of the simple 'false'?

Greets,
 Jeroen

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email