> Don't do that. For autoconfigured addresses it will probably work
> (probably) but for assigned addresses, things will break badly.
> There's no reason that on a link with prefixes A::/64 abd B::/64
> I can't assign A::1 and B::2 to node X, and A::2 and B::1 to node Y.
Yes, I was talking about autoconfigured addresses. I did have in mind
allowing the full addresses being configured as an option.
But, it does raise a question: if you configure "A::1", and then some
host happens to autoconfigure "fe80::1" and performs DAD on this
(ADDRCONF specially mentions that you can do DAD on link-local, as id
should be unique, and can freely assume that A::1 is also usable. You
don't need to do DAD on every combination!).
This is messy. Either you allow all id/prefix combinations and require
that plain "id" part is always unique on link, or you forget the
prefix/id split and treat all combinations as independent addresses,
which *ALL* require DAD to be usable.
My interpretation of related RFC's (Neighbor Discovery, ADDRCONF) is
that they speak of id/prefix combinations. If this isn't true, some
text needs revision.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List
IPng Home Page: http://playground.sun.com/ipng
FTP archive: ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng
Direct all administrative requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
