>> (I would actually suggest that in a pseudo-random method, now that we >> are clear that the bits have no meaning, it would be best to use them to >> provide two more bits of entropy rather than giving them fixed values.) > > Good grief. If the bits don't mean anything - and they never did, > since nobody ever interpreted them except in IETF > dancing-on-heads-of-pins discussions - could we simply say that they > are as random in value as any of the other bits in the IID are?
uh, the effective semantics of these two paragraphs are the same two more bits of entropy == as random in value as any of the other bits in the IID randy -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
