Re: [v6ops] Last Call: <draft-ietf-v6ops-unique-ipv6-prefix-per-host-03.txt> (Unique IPv6 Prefix Per Host) to Best Current Practice

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

 





Le 27/05/2017 à 06:24, Lorenzo Colitti a écrit :
On 26 May 2017 13:24, "Brian E Carpenter"
<brian.e.carpenter@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:brian.e.carpenter@xxxxxxxxx>>
wrote:

So the draft shouldn't assume a particular prefix length either. We
all know that it's usually 64 today, but that doesn't affect the
argument made by the draft.


It's always /64 for all addresses starting with binary 000, which
cannot be assigned to hosts in a real network because they are
unallocated space.

We need consistency with RFC 7608 (BCP 198).


No, we don't. RFC 7608 is about forwarding, not address assignment.

But forwarded packets reach assigned addresses.

Some situations can be unfortunate, such as forwarding a /65 to an address containing a 64bit IID.

Consistency is desirable.

Alex



_______________________________________________ v6ops mailing list
v6ops@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops





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