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

"Dearlove, Christopher (UK)" <Chris.Dearlove@baesystems.com> Mon, 02 August 2010 12:46 UTC

Return-Path: <Chris.Dearlove@baesystems.com>
X-Original-To: autoconf@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: autoconf@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7961D3A69E3 for <autoconf@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 2 Aug 2010 05:46:14 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.776
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.776 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.177, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id RDKsxZIUASp0 for <autoconf@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 2 Aug 2010 05:46:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ukmta3.baesystems.com (ukmta3.baesystems.com [20.133.40.55]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 260A83A68B2 for <autoconf@ietf.org>; Mon, 2 Aug 2010 05:46:13 -0700 (PDT)
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.55,302,1278284400"; d="scan'208";a="79674546"
Received: from unknown (HELO baemasodc004.greenlnk.net) ([10.108.36.11]) by Baemasodc001ir.sharelnk.net with ESMTP; 02 Aug 2010 13:46:40 +0100
Received: from glkms1103.GREENLNK.NET (glkms1103.greenlnk.net [10.108.36.194]) by baemasodc004.greenlnk.net (Switch-3.4.3/Switch-3.4.3) with ESMTP id o72CkePQ016928; Mon, 2 Aug 2010 13:46:40 +0100
Received: from GLKMS2100.GREENLNK.NET ([10.15.184.93]) by glkms1103.GREENLNK.NET with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Mon, 2 Aug 2010 13:46:39 +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 13:46:37 +0100
Message-ID: <ABE739C5ADAC9A41ACCC72DF366B719D034C6080@GLKMS2100.GREENLNK.NET>
In-Reply-To: <26410CAF-6B3A-4AAF-B194-1C1F989F4E27@inf-net.nl>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
thread-topic: [Autoconf] Using DHCPv6 without link-local? Support only EUI-64interfaces?
thread-index: AcsyO015zSSYVuIDRLekb8ptW4j8twABUmPw
References: <EBE1B970-DADA-4643-BB75-4EDEDE41F758@inf-net.nl><4C568726.1020307@gmail.com> <26410CAF-6B3A-4AAF-B194-1C1F989F4E27@inf-net.nl>
From: "Dearlove, Christopher (UK)" <Chris.Dearlove@baesystems.com>
To: "Teco Boot" <teco@inf-net.nl>, "Alexandru Petrescu" <alexandru.petrescu@gmail.com>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 02 Aug 2010 12:46:39.0983 (UTC) FILETIME=[C08B1FF0:01CB3240]
Cc: autoconf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Autoconf] Using DHCPv6 without link-local? Support only EUI-64interfaces?
X-BeenThere: autoconf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Ad-Hoc Network Autoconfiguration WG discussion list <autoconf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf>, <mailto:autoconf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/autoconf>
List-Post: <mailto:autoconf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:autoconf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf>, <mailto:autoconf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2010 12:46:14 -0000

I recall Dave Thaler tiptoeing through this minefield in an
autoconf meeting, maybe Stockholm. He seemed to negotiate it.

-- 
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

-----Original Message-----
From: autoconf-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:autoconf-bounces@ietf.org] On
Behalf Of Teco Boot
Sent: 02 August 2010 13:08
To: Alexandru Petrescu
Cc: autoconf@ietf.org autoconf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Autoconf] Using DHCPv6 without link-local? Support only
EUI-64interfaces?


                    *** WARNING ***

  This message has originated outside your organisation,
  either from an external partner or the Global Internet. 
      Keep this in mind if you answer this message.
 

Op 2 aug 2010, om 10:51 heeft Alexandru Petrescu het volgende
geschreven:

> I was thinking about the same thing as you say: if RFC5889 forbids
link
> local addresses and new Charter wants DHCP then how could both work?

The document doesn't say "forbid".

Teco

_______________________________________________
Autoconf mailing list
Autoconf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf


********************************************************************
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.
********************************************************************