>> Michel Py wrote: >> IPv6 over ethernet: stick to exactly /64. Probably for TR and >> FDDI too. >> IPv6 over foo: it might be desirable to get a lower value >> (make it fit on a nibble or byte boundary) _if_ accompanied >> by RFC2373 modifications or new text that define a fixed >> aggregation boundary for routing purposes.
> Alexandru Petrescu wrote: > I like these, FWIW. This would imply changes in the meanings > of Prefix 001 and Prefix 000. I doubt the intended meaning > can be to have Ethernet under Prefix 001 and all other L2's > under Prefix 000. I think that it is all under 001. Allocating another 1/8th of the v6 address space (000) to save pennies on the 001 does not make a lot of sense to me. Michel. -------------------------------------------------------------------- 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] --------------------------------------------------------------------
