Hi Thomas, On Fri, Sep 23, 2011 at 8:21 AM, Thomas Narten <nar...@us.ibm.com> wrote: > Donald Eastlake <d3e...@gmail.com> writes: > >> It's absurd for these registries to be operated so that they can get >> out of sync and so that conflicting uses can be allocated for the same >> EUI / derived-IID. The IANA Considerations for these registries should >> be updated, if necessary, so that can't happen. I believe that the EUI >> registry is, in some vague small sense, more fundamental because you >> can do a variety of different things with an EUI, not just create an >> IID. > > They are separate registries, serving different purposes. It is not > immediately clear to me what it means for them to "get out of > sync". Can you elaborate a bit more?
IPv6 Interface Identifiers (IIDs) are 64 bit quantities. Various RFCs say you can use a Modified EUI-64 for an IID on the basis that you control the base EUI-64. And control of some EUI-64s can derive from control of an EUI-48 (i.e., a MAC address) or IPv4 address. It would seem unfortunate if someone specified some IID for special use when someone else could start innocently using it, believing it was theirs, due to their control of an EUI-64 or EUI-48 or IPv4 address. Thanks, Donald ============================= Donald E. Eastlake 3rd +1-508-333-2270 (cell) 155 Beaver Street, Milford, MA 01757 USA d3e...@gmail.com > Thanks! > > Thomas -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
