TLA or sTLA (Re)

[ksb]

Message was returned.
So I try again, sorry to make trouble.

Tim Chown wrote:

> The /35 allocation is an initial allocation to the provider; the
"real"
> allocation is a /29, which you can grow into.  A number of people have

> suggested assigning the /29 from the start.
>
>         2001:           16 bits (fixed prefix, unicast addressing)
>         top level:      13 bits (allows for 8,000+ top level ISPs)
>         intermediate:   6+13 bits
>         site level:     16 bits (on the assumption of /48 per site)

Thank you for your good information.

> What do you mean by "several IPv6 businesses" ?

One ISP(like Korea Telecom) can operate a research IPv6 network
(KOREN in Korea), a business IPv6 network and a mobile IPv6 network
(ex: IMT-2000).
In that case, the IPv6 addressing planner hopes to have 3 sTLAs.

Telco should be changed to ISP (paradigm shift).
ISPs (from Telcos) like to keep the E.164 format(telephone number
architecture) and they try to insert E.164 in IPv6 address architecture.

Should ISPs follow RFC 2373?

Then I have a guestion.
What are good points of IS-IS (rather than OSPF)?

Thank you.


--
  Kim, Sahng-Beom / Korea Telecom
  TEL :    +82-42-870-8322
  FAX :    +82-42-870-8279
  E-mail :  ksbn@kt.co.kr
--