I agree that the explanation in the RFC is as simple as can be written. In fairness to Nilesh, we should mention that this was a controversial choice at the time, but that is what the WG decided a number of years ago.
Brian
JINMEI Tatuya wrote:
On Sun, 04 Jul 2004 00:45:13 +0530, Nilesh Simaria <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
I have a question about RFC- 2373, 2.5.1 Interface Identifiers.
It says : "The motivation for inverting the "u" bit when forming the interface identifier is to make it easy for system administrators to hand configure local scope identifiers when hardware tokens are not available. This is expected to be case for serial links, tunnel end- points, etc. The alternative would have been for these to be of the form 0200:0:0:1, 0200:0:0:2, etc., instead of the much simpler ::1, ::2, etc."
I am not able to understand above paragraph of rfc-2373. Can someone please explain ?
I'm not able to understand which part of the paragraph you did not understand...if we did not invert the "u" bit in the interface identifier and wanted to assign the identifier manually (for whatever reason), then we'd need to set the bit corresponding to the "u" bit since the identifier should not be global unique. As a result, we'd end up having less-readable or less-convenient address like 2001:db8::200:0:0:1 while we'd actually want to use a simpler form of "2001:db8::1".
BTW, the explanation is almost same as what is written in the RFC...(again, I'm not able to understand which part of the paragraph you did not understand).
JINMEI, Tatuya Communication Platform Lab. Corporate R&D Center, Toshiba Corp. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
