Re: Review of draft-ietf-6man-rfc4291bis-06

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

 



On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 4:08 PM, Randy Bush <randy@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> So while Randy may well be right that we will move away from classful
> eventually

that is the line i was fed 15+ years ago.  i did not accept it then and
i see no good reason to accept it now.

You might in another 15 years :)
 
> we certainly never had it in the top 64 bite of the address

bzzt!  you may want to look at rfc 2450.

Oh wow. Yes, I had forgotten. But that was not just classful addressing, that would have been a much bigger change, with business implications as well.
 
> For now, I'd much prefer to just add a similar exception to the one we
> have in 7421.

you'll need to start an iana registry.  for p2p some use /127, some
/126, and i have seen /120 on a multipoint mesh, worked fine.

I'm sure they worked fine. I don't know if there will be consensus to change the documents to say that those lengths are in spec.
 
we have had to fight massively with vendors to make it classless.
please do not give them excuses to break things.

On a lot of hardware /65 - /126 is not very well-supported.

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