>> What, on an IPv6 host or router, cares about the g bit apart from the >> code that uses an EUI-48 or EUI-64 to create an EID? What starts from >> an EID and extracts from it an EUI-64/48 address, or in any other way >> interprets the g flag in an EID? >> >> u and g are a recurring theme. Apart from the people who wrote RFC >> 4291, who are under the delusion that the only link layer in the world >> is an Ethernet, who actually cares? > > they are a repeating pita and should be removed. > > my only hesitation is if ilnp has no viable alternative. though i am > sufficiently unclear about ilnp's deployability to be uncomfortable > retaining painful kink for it.
my reading of RFC6741 section 2.1 is that ILNP does not depend on the u/g flags. i.e. ILNP appear to work fine with both global scope and local scope identifiers, and does not appear to require code to actually look at the u-bit. cheers, Ole -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list [email protected] Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
