On 2009-10-14 14:09, Christian Huitema wrote: >>> The second question regards the uniqueness of host >>> identifiers. Suppose we define the address used for stateless >>> translation as: 32 bit "provider" prefix, 32 bit IPv4 >>> address, and a constant identifier, either 0 or the "checksum >>> neutrality" value, which is only a function of the provider >>> prefix. Suppose now that for some reason there are two "IPv4 >>> addressed" hosts on the same link, e.g. because many servers >>> are located in the same server room. The two hosts will have >>> different addresses, in different 64 bit subnets, but they >>> will also have different host identifiers. Is that OK? >> Why wouldn't it be OK? I can't see why it's a question. >> The normal expectation is that different hosts have different >> IIDs so I am curious why this matters. > > I just realize I made "typo". I meant to say " The two hosts will have > different addresses, in different 64 bit subnets, but they will also have > the same host identifiers. Is that OK?
Well, that would be OK if you set U=0 as far as I can see. It might be an odd situation, but then nobody should ever rely on their uniqueness. It might be safer to make U=0 mandatory for these synthetic addresses in all cases. If you don't respect the UG bits we are asking for trouble anyway. Brian -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
