Jouni,
On 19/12/2012 21:19, Jouni Korhonen wrote:
> On Dec 19, 2012, at 5:58 PM, Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpen...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On 19/12/2012 14:44, Bless, Roland (TM) wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On 19.12.2012 14:21, Rémi Després wrote:
>>>> Could we limit the 6man discussion to the question asked by Softwire,
>>>> i.e. whether new IID types can be defined, using u=g=1, with a first
>>> ^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>> Sorry, I'm not yet aware of a concept called IID _types_?
>>> Do we really have such a thing "IID types"?
>> I think that's an important point. If we could make a statement like
>>
>> "The IID consists of N bits that have no meaning; the only constraint
>
> Hmm.. how would this work with RFC5453 reserved IID space we already
> have for anycast addresses?
Good question, but I don't think it's a problem except one of wording.
"The IID consists of N bits that have no encoded meaning; the only
constraint is that they must be unique within the scope of a given link
and routing prefix. Some IID values are reserved for special use [RFC5453]."
Brian
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
ipv6@ietf.org
Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------
