At an earlier stage I suggested restricting the applicability of the "However..." sentence to SLAAC [RFC4862]. A short way of doing this would be However, the Interface ID of unicast addresses used for Stateless Address Autoconfiguration [RFC4862] is required to be 64 bits long. Regards Brian On 14/02/2017 11:32, David Farmer wrote: > I have concerns with the following text; > > IPv6 unicast routing is based on prefixes of any valid length up to > 128 [BCP198]. For example, [RFC6164] standardises 127 bit prefixes > on inter-router point-to-point links. However, the Interface ID of > all unicast addresses, except those that start with the binary value > 000, is required to be 64 bits long. The rationale for the 64 bit > boundary in IPv6 addresses can be found in [RFC7421] > > The third sentence seems to limit exceptions to 64 bit IIDs to exclusively > addresses that start with binary vale of 000. There are at least two other > exceptions from standards track RFCs, that should be more clear accounted > for in this text. First is [RFC6164] point-to-point links, as mentioned in > the previous sentence. I think the clear intent of [RFC6164] is to allow > one(1) Bit IIDs for point to point-to-point links using any Global Unicast > Address, not just those that start with 000. Second is, [RFC6052], which > updates [RFC4921] and seems to allow 32 bit IIDs or /96 prefixes for any > Global Unicast Address when used for IPv4/IPv6 translation, referred to as > ""Network-Specific Prefix" unique to the organization deploying the address > translators," in section 2.2 of [RFC6052]. > > Thanks. > > On Wed, Feb 1, 2017 at 5:51 PM, The IESG <iesg-secretary@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> >> The IESG has received a request from the IPv6 Maintenance WG (6man) to >> consider the following document: >> - 'IP Version 6 Addressing Architecture' >> <draft-ietf-6man-rfc4291bis-07.txt> as Internet Standard >> >> The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits >> final comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the >> ietf@xxxxxxxx mailing lists by 2017-03-01. Exceptionally, comments may be >> sent to iesg@xxxxxxxx instead. In either case, please retain the >> beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting. >> >> Abstract >> >> >> This specification defines the addressing architecture of the IP >> Version 6 (IPv6) protocol. The document includes the IPv6 addressing >> model, text representations of IPv6 addresses, definition of IPv6 >> unicast addresses, anycast addresses, and multicast addresses, and an >> IPv6 node's required addresses. >> >> This document obsoletes RFC 4291, "IP Version 6 Addressing >> Architecture". >> >> >> >> >> The file can be obtained via >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-6man-rfc4291bis/ >> >> IESG discussion can be tracked via >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-6man-rfc4291bis/ballot/ >> >> >> No IPR declarations have been submitted directly on this I-D. >> >> >> >> >> -------------------------------------------------------------------- >> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list >> ipv6@xxxxxxxx >> Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 >> -------------------------------------------------------------------- >> > > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > IETF IPv6 working group mailing list > ipv6@xxxxxxxx > Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 > -------------------------------------------------------------------- >