>I speculate that one possible reason for this was to design a SLAAC over >Ethernet that is reliable, simple, universal and straightforward to >implement.
BINGO. And those are all (IMHO) Good Things. > >In a way, I see SLAAC to have become so popular as opposed to DHCP. >Were DHCPv6 more developed we wouldn't have this IID-64bit problem, I think. We could debate how "popular" SLAAC is (many of those arguments, both pro and con, are environment / deployment specific), but more relevant - some DHCP implementations also assume a 64b IID. Which aspect is the cart and which is the horse could also be debated, but the real point is - again - that this assumption has been baked-in to so many things that changing it is (yes, still IMHO) a Bad Thing. /TJ -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list [email protected] Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
