2013-02-08 à 10:51, sth...@nethelp.no : >>> ... You just ASSUME something I think we all understand is not >>> possible to guaranty. There will be collision, deal with it. >> >> Let me make the point again. >> It is a fact (not an assumption) that RFC4291-conforming IIDs either have >> u=0, in which case other bits may have any values, or, if they have have >> g=1, have a specified structure. So far the only such structure is that of >> IEEE derived IIDs. With it, g=0 because these IIDs are those of unicast >> addresses. > > However, there is nothing which enforces RFC4291-conforming IIDs for > (for instance) statically configured IPv6-addresses. > So in what way do > well defined u/g values for RFC4291-conforming IIDs help you?
1. Users that manually configure their IPv6 addresses should be knowledgeable about what they do. If one configures an address has u=g=1, unless it is for an experiment, it is a human mistake (it conflicts with the IPv6 addressing architecture of RFC 4291). Depending on the context, this mistake will have no consequence or will eventually have to be corrected. Note that, even if one does such a mistake in a 4rd site, the likelihood of using the 4rd IID prefix 0x0300 remains low. 2. On my home network, I know nobody is doing manual configuration. Regards, RD > > Steinar Haug, AS 2116 -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
