Re: IPv6 Zone Identifiers Considered Hateful

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Francis Dupont wrote:
 In your previous mail you wrote:

 Looking at the link-local address, it appears to be constructed from
 the interface's MAC address, and basically nothing else.
       ^^^^^^^^^^^

=> note the IEEE spec says device MAC address and if the common
interpretation is device == NIC there is at least one vendor where
device == machine, i.e., you get the same MAC address so same link-local
address on all the 10 interfaces of a 10 interface box!

Regards

Francis.Dupont@xxxxxxxxxx

PS: I maintain my opinion: zone identifiers don't suck, link-local
addresses used where they should not definitely suck.


Maybe link local addresses are erroneously used where one should use RFC4193 (Unique Local IPv6 Unicast Addresses) with L=1? (I mean where link local addresses are inconvenient but not necessary.)

I.e. something like FDxx:yyyy:zzzz:nnnn:id
where xx:yyyy:zzzz is 40 random bits that you pick-up as you wish,
nnnn is a subnet id for your (local) routing scheme
id is the 64 bits interface ID ...

It's a suggestion.

I guess the trouble of assigning addresses in this way is much smaller than tracking link local addresses derived from hardware serial numbers. The interface ID assignment strategy/tools with RFC4193 is deemed to be close to the strategy/tools useful for globally routable addresses.

Is this well explained in the IPv6 tutorials?

Regards,

--
- Thierry Moreau



[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]