>> 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.
What's the operational failure mode? Does it fail in a way which would be obvious to the ones who has made this mistake, or will simply some seemingly-random pairs of hosts fail to communicate? I think it would be an engineering mistake to willfully create hard-to-detect failure scenarios via a modification to already fielded standards. > Note that, even if one does such a mistake in a 4rd site, the > likelihood of using the 4rd IID prefix 0x0300 remains low. That's a nice handwave... > 2. > On my home network, I know nobody is doing manual configuration. That doesn't really prove anything. Regards, - Håvard -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
