> > Message: 1 > Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2010 15:10:25 -0000 > From: "6lowpan issue tracker" <[email protected]> > Subject: [6lowpan] #65: Deriving IIDs from Short Addresses > To: [email protected] > Cc: [email protected] > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > #65: Deriving IIDs from Short Addresses > > --------------------------------+------------------------------------------- > Reporter: j...@? | Owner: j...@? > Type: defect | Status: new > Priority: major | Milestone: > Component: hc | Version: > Severity: Active WG Document | Keywords: > > --------------------------------+------------------------------------------- > One of the issues raised on the ML and in Anaheim is the issue of deriving > IIDs from IEEE 802.15.4 short addresses. There was general consensus that > the PAN ID should never be included in the IID. As such, I think we now > have the following two options: > > 1) Maintain the RFC 4944 translation (short address -> ethernet address -> > 64-bit IID). Generated IIDs will be 64 bits in length and of the form > (0000:00ff:fe00:xxxx), where xxxx is the short address. > > 2) Update RFC 4944 translation to (short address -> 17-bit IID). > Generated IIDs will be 17 bits in length and of the form > (0000:0000:0001:xxxx), where xxxx is the short address. > > The primary difference between the two options are the lengths of prefixes > that may be used to generate global addresses. Option 1 says that > different PANs must be assigned unique 64-bit prefixes. Option 2 says > that different PANs must be assigned unique 111-bit prefixes, but that > multiple PANs may utilize the same 64-bit prefix. > > I am comfortable with either option, but we need to agree on one that is > well-defined. So which would people prefer? If you have no preference, > please provide that feedback as well. > > -- > Ticket URL: <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/6lowpan/trac/ticket/65> > 6lowpan <http://tools.ietf.org/6lowpan/> > > either is OK, but consider about connectivity with other network, I prefer optinon 1), using 64-bit prefixs. -- Huan Huan
BII Group IPv6 R&D Center Technique Project Manager
_______________________________________________ 6lowpan mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowpan
