This would break dead-neighbor detection, but, I'm not sure that's necessarily a problem for end hosts at the local router level.
It is touted as one of the IPv6 features, but, I'm not sure how valuable it is as a feature. Owen On Jan 6, 2011, at 7:37 AM, Marcel Plug wrote: > Perhaps we're reaching the point where we can say "We don't need an ND > table for a /64 network". If the ethernet MAC is embedded in the IPv6 > address, we don't need to discover it because we already know it. If > the IPv6 address has been manually configured on a host, perhaps that > host should now accept traffic directed to the MAC that the lower 64 > bits of the IPv6 address would translate to. > > Perhaps this idea has been discussed somewhere and discarded for its > flaws, but if not, perhaps it should be :-). > > Marcel > > (First post by the way, go easy on me :-) > > On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 10:19 AM, Jack Bates <jba...@brightok.net> wrote: >> >> On 1/6/2011 12:26 AM, Joe Greco wrote: >>> >>> A bunch of very smart people have worked on IPv6 for a very long >>> time, and justification for /64's was hashed out at extended length >>> over the period of years. >> >> NDP should have been better designed. It still has the same problems we had >> with ARP except the address pool has magnified it. >> >> Routers should have 1) better methods for keeping ND tables low (and >> maintaining only valid entries) or 2) better methods for learning valid >> entries than unsolicited NDP requests. >> >> This isn't to say the protocol itself is a waste, but it should have taken >> in the concerns and developed the mitigation controls necessary as >> recommendations to the implementers. >> >> >> Jack >> >>