yup, makes sense. OK
On 2018 Mar 07 (Wed) at 18:29:07 +0100 (+0100), Florian Obser wrote:
:RFC 7136 clarifies that the "u" and "g" bits are only significant when
:IPv6 unicast interface identifiers are derived from IEEE link-layer
:addresses. In all other cases the interface identifier should
RFC 7136 clarifies that the "u" and "g" bits are only significant when
IPv6 unicast interface identifiers are derived from IEEE link-layer
addresses. In all other cases the interface identifier should be
treated as an opaque value.
Accordingly stop fiddling with the bits for privacy addresses.
