Le 2012-12-20 à 11:44, Brian E Carpenter <[email protected]> a écrit :
> Rémi, > > I think this might work, and is nicely orthogonal to my question > whether the u/g bits have any intrinsic value. > > One question though. You suggest > 0300:0000:0000:0000-03FF:FFFF:FFFF:FFFF > but I understand that 4rd needs 6 bytes, not 7. > > Is there any reason you did not propose > 0300:0000:0000:0000-0300:FFFF:FFFF:FFFF ? The reason was compatibility with the current 4rd draft, but I agree that 6 free bytes is enough, and is therefore better. This can be part of the 6man answer to Softwire. > > Also, is there any reason not to choose (for example) > FDFE:0000:0000:0000-FDFE:FFFF:FFFF:FFFF > which is near the existing anycast range ? No objection that I can see. Support for including this in the 6man answer. Thanks, RD > > Regards > Brian > > On 20/12/2012 10:07, Rémi Després wrote: >> Hello, chairs, >> >> - First a great thank you Jouni for for the reference to RFC 5453, which is >> perfectly relevant but had been ignored in this discussion. >> The good news is that, since an IANA registry for IID ranges has already >> been created, no new registry is needed for any new IID type, and in >> particular for 4rd. >> >> - Small problem: at http://www.iana.org/protocols, a registry for "Reserved >> Internet Protocol version 6 (IPv6) Interface Identifiers" is listed but, >> when clicking to open it, the page that comes is that of "Instant Message >> Disposition Notification (IMDN) Headers". This should be easy to fix I >> suppose. >> >> - For 4rd, it is then sufficient that the table of >> http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5453#section-3 (to be reflected in the IANA >> registry), becomes: >> >> +-----------------------------------------+-------------------------+ >> | Interface Identifier Range | Description | >> +-----------------------------------------+-------------------------+ >> | 0000:0000:0000:0000 | Subnet-Router Anycast | >> | | [RFC4291] | >> | | | >> | 0300:0000:0000:0000-03FF:FFFF:FFFF:FFFF | Reserved 4rd Unicast | >> | | Addresses [RFCxxxx] | >> | | | >> | FDFF:FFFF:FFFF:FF80-FDFF:FFFF:FFFF:FFFF | Reserved Subnet Anycast | >> | | Addresses[RFC2526] | >> +-----------------------------------------+-------------------------+ >> >> A possible answer from 6man to Softwire is then a request to modify the IANA >> section of the 4rd draft to reflect the above. >> >> >> Regards, >> RD >> >> >> >> >> 2012-12-19 à 22:19, Jouni Korhonen <[email protected]> : >> ... >>> Hmm.. how would this work with RFC5453 reserved IID space we already >>> have for anycast addresses? >> > -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list [email protected] Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
