Christian Huitema wrote :
Xu Xiaohu wrote :

It seems ok to redefine the specification once the constraint on IPv4-embeded IPv6 addresses has been removed, just as what we are
now doing on SIIT. (E.g., replacing the IPv4-Compatible IPv6
Address and IPv4-Mapped IPv6 Address with IPv4-translatable IPv6
address and IPv4-converted IPv6 address respectively).

This may be possible then... or not (one never knows).
To avoid unnecessary discussions, it is IMHO wiser not to try to decide
anything about this now.


Any revision of the IPv6 addressing rules in 6MAN is going to take a
long time. Maybe several years.

Doing better should be a goal, at least to reach consensus.
This discussion started long ago, but so far without real attempts to reach conclusion.
It seems to be the time do deal with it.

Christian, as you are one of those who have lived the early history of
IPv6, do you know any *technical objection*, from any one, for the following which, as new address formats are and will be defined, should be more appropriate than the current text:

"For all unicast addresses other than those that start with the
binary value 000, and that are used as destinations on IPv6 links having
/64 subnet prefixes, Interface IDs are required to be constructed in
Modified EUI-64 format.
If new formats are defined in the future for such Interface IDs, they
must be distinguishable from the Modified EUI-64 format, i.e. must
have their two lower bits of the first octet both set to 1"

I would rather not wait that long before we publish the addressing
format document.

Agreed.

Beside, complying with the rule is not that hard. So
why bother?

Bothering about this question now is better to avoid coming back to the same subject over and over again, and to permit simpler designs in the future.


Regards,

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

Reply via email to