Francis.Dupont wrote: > About your proposal, if we set the globally unique bit on, > you get IIDs > which are no more globally unique. If it is off, this won't avoid > collision... The only advantage is the clarity, i.e. last argument.
The state of the bit is not the determining value in uniqueness, so I believe the bit should be set to local like it is for ISATAP. They would still be as unique as any other IANA registered value. Matt Crawford wrote: > Which would be <prefix>:0200:5eXX:XXYY:YYYY in IPv6 interface id > form. The XXXX portion need not be equal to fffe (but should not be > ffff). I agree it should not be ffff or fffe, but would set the u/l bit off. If they need to exist we should stick them in 0000:53ff:fdyy:yyyy. Again, I have not been convinced there is any value in defining well known host addresses (anycast prefixes yes, hosts no). Tony -------------------------------------------------------------------- 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] --------------------------------------------------------------------
