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

"Dearlove, Christopher (UK)" <> Mon, 02 August 2010 08:37 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 27C943A6B2F for <>; Mon, 2 Aug 2010 01:37:10 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.513
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.513 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.514, BAYES_50=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 7bk6FpAYEPmO for <>; Mon, 2 Aug 2010 01:36:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id A3A093A6B0F for <>; Mon, 2 Aug 2010 01:36:09 -0700 (PDT)
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.55,302,1278284400"; d="scan'208";a="79593867"
Received: from unknown (HELO ([]) by with ESMTP; 02 Aug 2010 09:35:47 +0100
Received: from glkms1102.GREENLNK.NET ( []) by (Switch-3.4.3/Switch-3.4.3) with ESMTP id o728ZlqL032745; Mon, 2 Aug 2010 09:35:47 +0100
Received: from GLKMS2100.GREENLNK.NET ([]) by glkms1102.GREENLNK.NET with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Mon, 2 Aug 2010 09:35:47 +0100
x-mimeole: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2010 09:35:45 +0100
In-Reply-To: <>
thread-topic: [Autoconf] Using DHCPv6 without link-local? Support only EUI-64interfaces?
thread-index: Acswoj7LFOqjLu+bTimqsxJy7o89kgBemVDQ
References: <> <ABE739C5ADAC9A41ACCC72DF366B719D034C5D21@GLKMS2100.GREENLNK.NET> <>
From: "Dearlove, Christopher (UK)" <>
To: "Teco Boot" <>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 02 Aug 2010 08:35:47.0298 (UTC) FILETIME=[B471AC20:01CB321D]
Subject: Re: [Autoconf] Using DHCPv6 without link-local? Support only EUI-64interfaces?
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Ad-Hoc Network Autoconfiguration WG discussion list <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2010 08:37:39 -0000

> 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
Compression over MPLS" Without reading it, that's not the title of an
that I'd read to discuss the issues of EUI-64 addresses and the issues I

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

Please note that I have never said that centralised addresses are
for anyone. But they are unsuitable for everyone, as issues you don't
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: +44 1245 242194  Fax: +44 1245 242124

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.