At Wed, 18 Feb 2009 21:20:14 +0100, Alexandru Petrescu <alexandru.petre...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I'd think it simply breaks the standard, but I actually don't > > understand the point of the question in the first place. Maybe you > > want to explain what you're going to do with the additional 8bit > > space, and then ask others what they think about it. > > Well, nothing, do nothing with the additional 8bit space. Make it 0, > that's it. Then I don't think you can convince others (including myself) to change the spec. > It doesn't use it for anything. It is there just in order to put a > 56bit prefix in the RA and the other end to auto-configure an address ok. > > Why should I put a /64 in the RA when that link is adminsitratively > assigned a /56. If your goal is to use a /56 as an on-link prefix while using stateless autoconfiguration, you can do it without changing the standard by advertising: - prefix P::/56 with L=1, A=0, and - prefix P::/64 with L=0, A=1 if the receiving host is fully compliant with RFC4861 and 4862. --- JINMEI, Tatuya Internet Systems Consortium, Inc. -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
