On Feb 4, 2013, at 7:48 PM, Fernando Gont <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 02/04/2013 12:45 PM, Jouni Korhonen wrote:
>>
>>> On 02/04/2013 06:42 AM, Rémi Després wrote:
>>>> In this respect, changing now the IPv6 specification for hosts that
>>>> configure IIDs having u=1, although no serious need has been
>>>> identified, and this specification has ben used, would be in my
>>>> understanding very counterproductive: stability of already used
>>>> specifications is important for their success.
>>>
>>> I strongly disagree. For many reasons, including:
>>>
>>> 1) What's broken, is broken. And if it's known to be broken, it should
>>> be fixed.
>>
>> It is awkward but not broken imho, so in this respect I would think twice
>
> FWIW, my comment was in response of the general statement "stability of
> already used specifications is important for their success".
>
> Actually, I'm not opposed to "stable specifications", but about
Good.
> resistance to change/fix/improve those things just because to maintain
> the status quo.
Understand. But within this specific ug topic I am still not convinced
myself that what we have now is broken or would even need a facelift..
>> changing RFC4291. However, I do agree Randy about magic bits and the pain
>> involved. Actually, a lot IPv6 business recently has been around adding
>> magic to IPv6 addressing, which I kind of find uncomfortable..
>
> Not sure what you mean. For instance,
> draft-ietf-6man-stable-privacy-addresses doesn't change the
Your draft is just fine since it is by the RFC4291 rules. I should have
been more precise with my above comment, which was a generic comment about
the desire to specify something that ends up to a special IPv6 address
handling or configuration just because we have 'so many bits to play with'.
- Jouni
> architecture, but simply is an alternative algorithm that fits in the
> existing architecture.
>
> Cheers,
> --
> 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
--------------------------------------------------------------------
