If the next 54 bits are always expected to be zero then the prefix should be declared to fe80::/64, and RFC 3513 should be corrected.
Do any of the old timers have a take on this one? Jim, Keith, Tony, Brian..... anyone? :-) CP > > On Aug 27, 2003, at 9:19 AM, Derek Fawcus wrote: > > > On Wed, Aug 27, 2003 at 09:57:23AM -0500, Suresh Krishnan (QB/EMC) > > wrote: > >> Hi Chirayu, > >> No. You cannot use fe81::/16 as a link local address > > > > Of course you can. > > > >> Even though the RFC states that the prefix is fe80::/10 it really > >> should be fe80::/64. Section 2.5.6 of RFC3513 explicitly states that > >> the 54 bits following 1111111010 should be set to 0 and thus the only > >> allowable prefix is fe80::/64. > > > > The contents of the 54 bits are only a should, as such one can use > > whatever > > one wants in there. > > > > Nothing breaks (wrt normal LL address usage) if those 54 bits have non > > zero > > values. > > Actually, you'll run in to some issues with any IPv6 stack based on > Kame's implementation. Kame makes use of some of those bits to embed > the scope id in some places while packets are handled in the kernel and > in a few cases this may be used between the kernel/userspace boundary. > Arguably, it's not the right thing for the stack to do, but it is done. > > -josh -------------------------------------------------------------------- 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] --------------------------------------------------------------------
