Status of the "u" bit for privacy extensions
Florent Fourcot <florent.fourcot@enst-bretagne.fr> Sun, 16 February 2014 20:33 UTC
Return-Path: <florent.fourcot@enst-bretagne.fr>
X-Original-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E6F71A0068 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 16 Feb 2014 12:33:27 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.55
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.55 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35] autolearn=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id uRuhdrY5qmd7 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 16 Feb 2014 12:33:25 -0800 (PST)
Received: from olfflo.fourcot.fr (fourcot.fr [IPv6:2001:4b98:dc0:41:216:3eff:fe52:be3b]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A9BE1A029B for <6man@ietf.org>; Sun, 16 Feb 2014 12:33:25 -0800 (PST)
Received: from reglisse.fourcot.fr (unknown [IPv6:2001:470:6d:5e8:227:10ff:feef:b458]) (Authenticated sender: reglisse) by olfflo.fourcot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9E6062DF38 for <6man@ietf.org>; Sun, 16 Feb 2014 21:33:21 +0100 (CET)
Received: from [IPv6:::1] (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by reglisse.fourcot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E6229805569 for <6man@ietf.org>; Sun, 16 Feb 2014 21:33:20 +0100 (CET)
Message-ID: <53012090.3080602@enst-bretagne.fr>
Date: Sun, 16 Feb 2014 21:33:20 +0100
From: Florent Fourcot <florent.fourcot@enst-bretagne.fr>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20131103 Icedove/17.0.10
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: 6man@ietf.org
Subject: Status of the "u" bit for privacy extensions
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/-RoZND_1wmzgLCOaWbkMsIll9Y8
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Tue, 18 Feb 2014 13:38:10 -0800
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: "IPv6 Maintenance Working Group \(6man\)" <ipv6.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ipv6/>
List-Post: <mailto:ipv6@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 16 Feb 2014 21:02:44 -0000
Hello, the RFC 7136 has removed/clarify the significance of bits in interface identifier for future iids generation, but it does not include any reference to some current iids generation. For example, the RFC 4941 asks to set the bit 6 to zero: http://tools.ietf.org/search/rfc4941#section-3.2.1 Should current implementations following this rule be updated? What is the current rule for this? Regards, -- Florent.
- Re: Status of the "u" bit for privacy extensions Florent Fourcot
- Re: Status of the "u" bit for privacy extensions Brian E Carpenter
- Status of the "u" bit for privacy extensions Florent Fourcot
- Re: Status of the "u" bit for privacy extensions Fernando Gont
- Status of the "u" bit for privacy extensions Florent Fourcot
- Re: Status of the "u" bit for privacy extensions Fernando Gont