Hi, One of reason behind exchanging Interface Identifier as part of IPV6CP, is to make sure its uniqueness in both ends. Link-local address is generated from the Interface Identifier.
If there is a clash, there is a chance both ends with use same address as link-local address? How we can avoid this? Thanks Subu -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, April 30, 2004 1:20 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: IPV6CP - RFC Compliance 2472 > Hi, > > According to RFC, Interface Identifier being used to not only for the > Link-local address, EUI-64 global unicast address is derived from that. > > Based on your input, > 1. How one end will come to know the other end address (both link-local and > global unicast address)? normally routers learn their peer's link-local address via routing protocol. there's no need to know global address. > 2. Will unicast routing protocol will advertise that address? or some other > protocol? they will advertise link-local address (in the case of RIPng). > 3. Can you please tell me, what is being followed by the industry in this > scenario ? what is "this scenario"? itojun -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
