>________________________________
> From: "Bless, Roland (TM)" <[email protected]>
>To: Rémi Després <[email protected]>
>Cc: [email protected]
>Sent: Thursday, 20 December 2012 7:27 AM
>Subject: Re: IIDs, u and g bits, and 4rd
>
>Hi Rémi,
>
>On 19.12.2012 18:59, Rémi Després wrote:
>
>> As is, the sentence misses that IIDs that have u=1 are expected to be
>> universally unique. (This uniqueness is key to ensure that, as long
>
>I don't agree. From an IPv6 functional point of view, IIDs only need to
>be unique within the link-local/subnet scope, so _universal_ uniqueness
>is not strictly _required_. Deriving the IID from a universally unique
>address may help to minimize the conflict probability within a subnet
>though.
I agree. It seems to me that all that RFC4291 is doing is specifying a method
or algorithm deriving an IPv6 IID from an IEEE address when one is available.
IPv6 IIDs aren't required to be derived from the IEEE address, otherwise static
and privacy IPv6 addresses would be illegal on interfaces with IEEE link layer
addresses.
I'm wondering what the real goal is. Is it to avoid having performing DAD by
assuming that the link layer address is guaranteed to be globally unique? That
guarantee hasn't ended up be true for IEEE addresses, so unless something
better than what the IEEE have done is invented I don't think it can ever be an
absolute guarantee, because you can't guarantee against future human error or
stupidity.
>
>> as a site has a stable IPv6 prefix, its statelessly auto-configured
>> hosts can have stable addresses if so desired.)
>
>You can also achieve the mentioned uniqueness of an IPv6 address by
>having manually assigned locally unique IIDs (which is typically used
>for servers since you don't want to change the IPv6 address each time
>your network interface must be replaced due to hardware problems...)
>combined with that stable (globally unique) IPv6 prefix.
>
>> Ensuring IID universal uniqueness for new types of universal-scope
>> addresses is the subject at hand. It can fortunately be dealt with
>> because we know that, today, all u=1 IIDs must also have g=0.
>
>what new types of universal-scope addresses?
>
>Regards,
>Roland
>--------------------------------------------------------------------
>IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
>[email protected]
>Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
>--------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
[email protected]
Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------
