Re: [Autoconf] Using DHCPv6 without link-local? Support only EUI-64interfaces?

["Dearlove, Christopher (UK)" <[e-mail]>]

> Chris, thanks for sharing your opinion.

Actually I mis-read what you wrote, so part of what I wrote I'd
want to modify myself. But the privacy/security point I would
repeat unchanged.

> On RFC 3091 and dupont-ipv6-rfc3041harmful, the recommendations are in
RFC 4901.

Is that the number you meant? That's titled "Protocol Extensions for
Header
Compression over MPLS" Without reading it, that's not the title of an
RFC
that I'd read to discuss the issues of EUI-64 addresses and the issues I
referenced.

> Centrally managed addresses could result in less, with 1 octet at a
minimum.
> This would be a good reason to use the more centralized approach.

Please note that I have never said that centralised addresses are
unsuitable
for anyone. But they are unsuitable for everyone, as issues you don't
discuss
are important (or more) some people's considerations.

-- 
Christopher Dearlove
Technology Leader, Communications Group
Networks, Security and Information Systems Department
BAE Systems Advanced Technology Centre
West Hanningfield Road, Great Baddow, Chelmsford, CM2 8HN, UK
Tel: [phone]  Fax: [phone]

BAE Systems (Operations) Limited
Registered Office: Warwick House, PO Box 87,
Farnborough Aerospace Centre, Farnborough, Hants, GU14 6YU, UK
Registered in England & Wales No: 1996687

********************************************************************
This email and any attachments are confidential to the intended
recipient and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended
recipient please delete it from your system and notify the sender.
You should not copy it or use it for any purpose nor disclose or
distribute its contents to any other person.
********************************************************************