Brian E Carpenter <[email protected]> wrote: >> I’m interested to have a parallel discussion on where RFC 8505 can not >> apply. In the products and use cases I’m aware of, it could, since we >> are actually faking it by snooping ND and DHCP to achieve similar but >> less accurate results.
> So if you are advocating a generalisation of RFC8505 to non-6lo LANs,
> that's certainly a discussion we could have, IMHO.
I think that it could be applied in situations of servers, such as data
centers where there are multiple tenants. (Many VM infrastructures have
shared front-end networks)
I think that temporary addressess are not a feature in some of those
deployments that everyone wants, and thus having a registration system is a
feature.
This does not solve the smartphone on new WIFI issue, which is a different
situation completely.
--
] Never tell me the odds! | ipv6 mesh networks [
] Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works | IoT architect [
] [email protected] http://www.sandelman.ca/ | ruby on rails [
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ 6lo mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lo
