Hi, Mohacsi, On 04/20/2012 10:09 AM, Mohacsi Janos wrote: > I support to have a semi stable private address. But very much > against the idea of replacing EUI-64 addresses.
You mean "against replacing addresses embedding IEEE identifiers"? > The client application > based on the policy should pick pivate or EUI-64 addresses. Just curious: Is there a specific use case for IEEE-derived addresses that cannot be satisfied with draft-gont-6man-stable-privacy-addresses? > Note: - Nothing stops me to pick MAC addresses from no longer existing > vendor e.g DEC Why would you want to do it? > I think the proper implementation of RFC 3041 or/and 4941 can solve your > problem I don't follow. RFC 4941 generates addresses in addition to the stable ones, so.. how could they possibly fix the scanning problem? Thanks! Best regards, -- Fernando Gont SI6 Networks e-mail: [email protected] PGP Fingerprint: 6666 31C6 D484 63B2 8FB1 E3C4 AE25 0D55 1D4E 7492 -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list [email protected] Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
