Re: <draft-ietf-6man-rfc4291bis-09.txt>

[David Farmer <[e-mail]>]

On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 3:12 AM, james woodyatt <[e-mail]> wrote:

> On Jul 19, 2017, at 09:57, Brian E Carpenter <[e-mail]>
> wrote:
>
> On 19/07/2017 18:22, james woodyatt wrote:
>
> On Jul 19, 2017, at 01:15, Brian E Carpenter <[e-mail]>
> wrote:
>
>
> Hmm. Let's consider a case in which the last-hop route to a given LAN has
> a prefix of
> length, say, /80. What is the name of the bit-string from bits 81 through
> 127 of the
> host address? If they aren't called the "IID" what are they called?
>
>
> If have yet to find where RFC 4291 clearly names the part of an IPv6
> address that follows a *routing* prefix apart from a *subnet* prefix.
> Moreover, the phrase “last-hop route to a given LAN” is not equivalent to
> the concept of a subnet, and such a routing prefix is not equivalent to a
> subnet prefix. As RFC 5942 clarifies.
>
>
> Agreed, but I phrased my question in full knowledge of that. What do we
> call those trailing
> bits of the address? (I was reading the source of the Python 'ipaddress'
> module yesterday,
> and saw a comment about 'host bits', but that seems very 20th century,
> given that the
> IPv6 architecture refers to interfaces.)
>
>
> I’ve been mentally using “address suffix” for this concept, and I find
> that I rarely have much need for it. I suppose if I were using on-link
> prefixes longer than /64, then I’d need it so I could differentiate between
> the 64-bit Interface ID and the shorter part of the address that follows
> the on-link prefix.
>

I think I'd prefer to call the righthand side of both a subnet prefix and a
on-link prefix an interface identifier, because in both case it is a node's
interface that is being identified.  Then generically they are interface
identifiers, if you are referring to a specific aspect it is qualified with
the aspect.

generically;

prefix / interface identifier

with specific aspects being referred to as;

subnet prefix / subnet interface identifier
on-link prefix / on-link interface identifier

Then it would be subnet interface identifiers that are 64 bits, except ...
and on-link interface identifiers are any length.

That is basically the assertion that started this part of the discussion,
and that did fly with at least some.

So, I've been kicking around other ideas, because if the righthand side of
an on-link prefix isn't an interface identifier, it needs another name. How
about;

node identifier
on-link identifier
host identifier
on-link node
on-link host

I think I like on-link node best, but on-link identifier is a close second
for me.

so;

subnet prefix / interface identifier
on-link prefix / on-link node

or;

subnet prefix / interface identifier
on-link prefix / on-link identifier

What do others think?

-- 
===============================================
David Farmer               Email:[e-mail]
Networking & Telecommunication Services
Office of Information Technology
University of Minnesota
2218 University Ave SE        Phone: [phone] <(612)%20626-0815>
Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029   Cell: 612-812-9952 <(612)%20812-9952>
===============================================