On 02/04/2013 06:11 AM, Rémi Després wrote: > > It depends on what is done with the new design, especially if it is backward > compatible and optional. > > The question that started this discussion is whether reserving a currently > unused IID range having u=1 is compatible with the IPv6 addressing > architecture (i.e. RFC 4291). > AFAICT, the answer is YES.
I believe that the original question really was "whether it makes sense to reserve an unused IID range for 4rd". As noted by Ran Atkinson, since 4rd is an experimental document, it seems more appropriate to separate a *shared* range for this kind of experiment, rather than assign an IID range to 4rd. Thanks, -- 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 --------------------------------------------------------------------
