On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 4:00 AM, Mark Smith < [email protected]> wrote:
> Apologies for that. Can we generalise the subject into non-64 bit > IIDs, as it also covers the /127 case, and nearly all the reasons for > non-/64s on LANs are the same as in the draft? > No, because I suspect the consensus that can be reached on non-64 bit IIDs is not the same as can be reached for /127. For example, I support /127s (I am among the authors of the draft) but don't support non-64 bit IIDs.
-------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list [email protected] Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
