Mark Smith: > Possibly it will be surprising to a number of people on this list, but > some of the ideas in IPv6 are over 30 years old, such as single, fixed > size network and node portions, and using link layer > addresses as layer > 3 node addresses - > > "Address Mappings", Jonathan B. Postel, 2 May 1979 > http://www.ietf.org/rfc/ien/ien91.txt
Doesn't surprise me at all. I take it, your position is that if an address can have a 64-bit prefix and a 64-bit host ID, then all you should need or want is classful addressing. And only one class at that. Does that sum it up? What's old is new again. We could almost revert back to RIPv1. I don't necessarily disagree, and I got that same message from others on the list in the past. And I also wouldn't suggest that prefixes shorter than 64 should be in heavy demand (except in assigning address blocks). It's just that the restriction seems unnecessary, especially given that /127s and /128s are already in use, that CIDR has been invented and everyone knows how it works, and also because the /64 restriction only matters for SLAAC. Bert -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
