Subject: RE: draft-ipngwg-default-addr-select-00.txt

From: Richard Draves <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 16:19:05 -0700

>                  Prefix    Precedence Label MatchSrcLabel
>                  fe80::/10     40       1         1
>                  fec0::/10     30       2         2
>                  ::/0          20       3         3
>                  2002::/16     10       4         4
>                  ::/96         10       5         5
> 
> Why dont you want to express a preference for 6to4 addresses
> over v4-compatible addresses ?

If that's what the WG wants I'm certainly open to it. The way I was thinking
of it was, prefer native addresses to transition addresses so that
eventually we can get out of transition mode. The details of which
transition mechanism one likes best seemed to me more local policy and less
global IPv6 default.

Rich
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List
IPng Home Page:                      http://playground.sun.com/ipng
FTP archive:                      ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng
Direct all administrative requests to [email-masked]
--------------------------------------------------------------------