Hi Nick, I missed that draft, but I like it :)
Back to our discussion I am not sure how definition of IPv6 Interface Identifiers came to the context of this thread. To the best of my understanding no one claims that SRv6 must be contained to IPv6 IIDs. RFC8986 section 3.2 uses an example of /64 IIDs, but this is only illustration with explicit wording "a network operator may:" which in no way should be read as any type of mandatory rule. Back to my example of few /10 sites interconnected over Internet - how any transit router is ever going to detect what am I doing with bits 11-128 in my sites ? Yes I do accept some special use address formats and I perfectly fine to make sure I will avoid using them. Many thx, Robert. On Sat, Oct 9, 2021 at 10:41 PM Nick Hilliard <n...@foobar.org> wrote: > Robert Raszuk wrote on 09/10/2021 21:26: > > Really ? Where ? I am looking at RFC4291 and nowhere I can find /64 > > reference. > > Robert, there's been extensive discussion about this on 6man. Please > run a search on the ietf mail archive for > draft-bourbaki-6man-classless-ipv6 to get a flavour for some of the > complexities involved. > > Nick >
_______________________________________________ spring mailing list spring@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring
