I also brought this issue up several months ago and received no follow-up. I agree that it is shortsighted.
- Pete See e-mail directly below. -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Barany, Pete Sent: Saturday, December 20, 2003 9:01 AM To: Brian Haberman; Stephen Sprunk Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Question about Interface ID length More generally, I still don't see why there is a restriction on the prefix length for all IPv6 unicast addresses where the first 3 MSBs are other than 000. I could understand the wording in RFC 3513 (and RFC 3513bis) if the restriction was intended for "unicast addresses that are configured via stateless address autoconfiguration" (thus my initial comment about the need to update RFC 2462bis). But some operators may want to use DHCPv6 (stateful address autoconfiguration) where there is no concept of prefixes per se (just 128 bit addresses). Therefore, as an example, if an operator wanted to have a /65 subnet(or some other subnet where the prefix is greater than /64) (and I am not saying that this is a good idea), at least the RFCs wouldn't prohibit it in the present/future. It seems like an unnecessary/unwise limitation IMHO. Regards, Pete -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Keith Moore Sent: Tuesday, May 25, 2004 10:14 AM To: Brian E Carpenter Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [rfc2462bis issue 281] Requirement for 64bit I/F ID I am still of the belief that limiting the routing prefix to 64 bits is a shortsighted design choice that will limit the lifetime and applicability of IPv6. Anything we can do to discourage the notion that an interface ID shall be 64 bits now and forever is, IMHO, a good idea. Keith > Architecturally, this appears to be the correct solution. > > (I would expect a lot of protest at any proposal to *actually* > deviate from 64 bits, but that is another discussion.) -- -- Regime change 2004 - better late than never. -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 -------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
