Folks, Some comments on draft-ietf-rtgwg-vrrp-rfc5798bis.
Section 7.4 says: ---- cut here ---- 7.4. IPv6 Interface Identifiers IPv6 routers running VRRP MUST create their Interface Identifiers in the normal manner, i.e., "Transmission of IPv6 Packets over Ethernet Networks" [RFC2464]. They MUST NOT use the virtual router MAC address to create the Modified Extended Unique Identifier (EUI)-64 identifiers. This VRRP specification describes how to advertise and resolve the VRRP router's IPv6 link-local address and other associated IPv6 addresses into the virtual router MAC address. ---- cut here ---- This text is non-compliant with RFC8064, which very explicitly says: ---- cut here ---- 3. Generation of IPv6 Interface Identifiers with SLAAC Nodes SHOULD implement and employ [RFC7217] as the default scheme for generating stable IPv6 addresses with SLAAC. A link layer MAY also define a mechanism for stable IPv6 address generation that is more efficient and does not address the security and privacy considerations discussed in Section 1. The choice of whether or not to enable the security- and privacy-preserving mechanism SHOULD be configurable in such a case. By default, nodes SHOULD NOT employ IPv6 address generation schemes that embed a stable link-layer address in the IID. In particular, this document RECOMMENDS that nodes do not generate stable IIDs with the schemes specified in [RFC2464], [RFC2467], [RFC2470], [RFC2491], [RFC2492], [RFC2497], [RFC2590], [RFC3146], [RFC3572], [RFC4338], [RFC4391], [RFC5072], and [RFC5121]. ---- cut here ---- Thanks! Regards, -- Fernando Gont SI6 Networks e-mail: [email protected] PGP Fingerprint: F242 FF0E A804 AF81 EB10 2F07 7CA1 321D 663B B494 _______________________________________________ rtgwg mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg
