Le 2013-02-11 à 11:55, Brian E Carpenter <[email protected]> a écrit :

> (Correcting the Subject header )
Oops, 6144 instead of 6164 was a typo!

> 
> That could be reported as an erratum against RFC 6164.

IN ADDITION to citing RFC 6164 as updating RFC 4291, this makes sense to me.

Thanks,
RD

> 
> Regards
>   Brian
> 
> On 11/02/2013 10:13, Rémi Després wrote:
>> Hi, Bob, Ole,
>> 
>> RFC 6164 (/127 on inter-router links) is in fact an update of RFC4291 (IPv6 
>> addressing architecture).
>> Yet, it isn't listed as such in https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4291.
>> Shouldn't this be fixed?
>> 
>> Regards,
>> RD
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> PS: This point has been noted during the discussion below concerning 4rd CEs 
>> and u/g bits of IIDs.: 
>> 
>> 2013-02-10 04:43, Usman Latif <[email protected]> 
>> ...
>>> So if I understand it correctly, if a PE-CE link already has a /127 prefix 
>>> assigned to it- and we wanted to use the CE as a 4rd CE, we'll have to 
>>> assign an additional IPv6 prefix to the CE with 64-bit IIDs?
>>> 
>>> Pls share little detail with me in a scenario where a SP already has /127 
>>> with CEs and 4rd is needed from the CE
>> 
>> According to RFC 6164, /127 prefixes are used ONLY on inter-router link. 
>> They cannot be used as customer-site IPv6 prefixes which, to comply with 
>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4291#section-2.5.1, MUST permit 64-bit IIDs. 
>> 
>> Each 4rd CE MUST therefore be delegated at least one IPv6 prefix having at 
>> most 64 bits (this doesn't depend on its WAN link having or not a /127). 
>> 
>> RD
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> 
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>> 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
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply via email to