sorry, but we can't all be nice all the time, see more inline,

On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 7:21 PM, Rémi Després <despres.r...@laposte.net> wrote:
<snip>
> (b) The benefit comes from the following, i.e. one of the 4rd objectives:
> - We want to statelessly establish automatic tunnels for residual IPv4 across 
> IPv6-only domains.

not a bad idea, but don't we have other options in this area?


> - We don't want, when doing so, to impose any renumbering of IPv6 link and/or 
> host.

excellent, any protocol/idea that impose this is quite badly designed.


> - This is possible ONLY IF we use, for each CE tunnel endpoint, an IPv6 
> address that no host in the CE site may be using.

I have always thought any address I get on my host from dhcpv6/ra or
similar, mixed with DAD and other mechanism are as close to a guaranty
as we can get.
No need for some magic bits of any type.


> - Fortunately this happens to be feasible, with IPv6 as is: in a site that is 
> delegated a prefix up to /64, no host that has a global unicast address 
> conforming to RFC4291 may have an IID in which u=g=1.

... You just ASSUME something I think we all understand is not
possible to guaranty. There will be collision, deal with it.

Someone will probably sooner than later, assign either auto (yes they
break the "rule") or manual an address that will cause two hosts on
the same link/site to have the same address no matter how much you
ASSUME the above (u=g=1...)


> - By reserving a small subset of this unused IID space, we reach our 
> objective.
>
> Hope it clarifies.

yes it clarifies to me that you suggest a quite broken way of using
IPv6 addresses. You ASSUME things, among that some magic bits (u and
g) will give you something close to an unique address.



-- 

Roger Jorgensen           | ROJO9-RIPE
rog...@gmail.com          | - IPv6 is The Key!
http://www.jorgensen.no   | ro...@jorgensen.no
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
ipv6@ietf.org
Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply via email to