Re: mulcast assignments

[Greg Shepherd <gjshep () gmail com>]

On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 1:42 PM,  <Valdis.Kletnieks () vt edu> wrote:
> On Thu, 03 May 2012 13:38:14 -0700, Greg Shepherd said:
> > > Make sense?
> >
> > Sure, for v6. :)
>
> Does it make sense to be planning new deployments for anythign else? ;)
>
> (Hint - if your reaction is "but we're not v6-capable", who's fault is that?)

The original question was not from me. :)

But even for IPv6 I would avoid embedded addressing and just use SSM.
With SSM there's no need for embedded addressing and again you get all
the security and network simplicity.

 FF3x::/96

Greg