>>> I actually don't know if "this ipv6-over-80211ocb spec needs to >>> rely on the use of a non-0 value in the intermediate 54 bits", btw. >>> If that's not the case, it's much safer and less controversial to >>> just not mention it (either in the form of "LL prefix length" or >>> more explicitly). I guess that's also what others are suggesting >>> (and I agree with them in that sense). > > There is the option of being silent about the prefix length of > IPv6 LLs in the IPv6-over-OCB document. > > There is the option of mentioning "fe80::/10", but with "Updates 4291 > section X" in the header of the 1st page. > > There is the option of proving by implementation that fe80:1::1/32 on > OCB is not harmful to others. Two of these options will likely prohibit consensus being reqched on this document. I encourage you to carefully consider how to best spend your time and the time of the particpants in the involved set of working groups. Ole
