Hi Roland,
> Yes, but my point was that we probably cannot assume > that every "device" in the Internet has a unique hardware ID, > because we may have many virtual hosts in the future. > How "smart" individual vendor's solutions are is IHMO out of scope here. I respectfully disagree. All physical devices have had a MAC address (or equivalent) for quite some time now. Even the virtual devices are emulating Ethernet, so for all practical purposes, EUI-48 and EUI-64 are a clear and distinct identifier space. The virtualization vendors need to be a little bit more pro-active in MAC address allocations, independent of everything else, and then IPv6 is good to go. > Ok. Moreover, I think that using the IPv6 privacy extensions in > combination with ILNP is actually quite useful, i.e., the ID > is fine for servers, but for end-users it's probably a good idea > to have several IDs an change them from time to time. Some people feel that that's appropriate. That's fine. I'm more of a mobility junkie myself. Tony _______________________________________________ rrg mailing list [email protected] http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg
