> best practice is not to use singleton addresses, but always to provide a /64 > prefix.
But, how does that work with ILA's approach of identifier management? With the previously IETF recommended approaches in RFC5213 and even in 3GPP architecture, per RFC3315, the network assigned a set of unique prefixes for each MN, allowed the MN to generate the identifiers. Even CGA addressing worked with the per-MN prefix model. But, with ILA there is no concept of prefix assignment. Will ILA network now generate a identifier block for each MN? Is DHCPv6 the only approach? If that block is not summarizable, will it not result in mapping table size getting multiple many times? Sri From: dmm <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> on behalf of Lorenzo Colitti <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Date: Monday, February 5, 2018 at 8:52 PM To: Tom Herbert <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Cc: "[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>, dmm <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Subject: Re: [DMM] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-herbert-ila-mobile-00.txt On Fri, Feb 2, 2018 at 6:27 AM, Tom Herbert <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: We like like to request that the dmm WG consider ILA as a candidate protocol for the 3GPP "Study on User Plane Protocol in 5GC". Echoing Tom's earlier comment about this: I think the address assignment sections (6.3 and 8.3) should be reworded to clarify that for general purpose hosts, best practice is not to use singleton addresses, but always to provide a /64 prefix.
_______________________________________________ dmm mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm
