I am certainly not suggesting using more than one Link-Local address for
a PPP client. All I am saying is if PPP uses IPV6CP and interface-id for
Link-Local address, it is a little odd to use DAD for rest of the
addresses assigned to the PPP client - the privacy and other addresses
that Dave alluded to. I don't want to change PPP in such a radical way -
given the nature of the p2p link it's not so odd if Link-local address
is negotiated using IPV6CP and other addresses of the PPP client use
DAD. We should just make such facts clear in 2472bis.

Thanks.

Hemant

-----Original Message-----
From: James Carlson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2007 5:20 PM
To: Hemant Singh (shemant)
Cc: Dave Thaler; JINMEI Tatuya / ????; ipv6@ietf.org; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Neighbor Discovery and PPP links

Hemant Singh (shemant) writes:
> All I am saying is, if IPV6CP is used to negotiate one interface-id, 
> when multiple addresses, that Dave pointed out, are needed for the 
> same client, why not use IPV6CP to negotiate interface-id's for even 
> these addresses?

We'd have to discuss that on the PPP list, but my take on it is that
it'd likely be incompatible with existing implementations.  I don't know
that anyone expects more than one IPV6CP Interface-Identifier option --
I know for certain that the open source ppp-2.4 implementation wouldn't
handle it right.

I think it'd be pretty strange operationally as well.  You'd end up with
multiple link-local addresses.

I don't think I agree with pushing this issue down into PPP.  We don't
do that for Ethernet, so why would PPP be special?

-- 
James Carlson, Solaris Networking              <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sun Microsystems / 1 Network Drive         71.232W   Vox +1 781 442 2084
MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757   42.496N   Fax +1 781 442 1677

--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
ipv6@ietf.org
Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply via email to