IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Detailed review of Significance of IPv6 Interface Identifiers

RJ Atkinson <rja.lists@gmail.com> Tue, 03 September 2013 22:42 UTC

Return-Path: <rja.lists@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E1C5621F8C20 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 3 Sep 2013 15:42:18 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id el5PK+Zng3Ga for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 3 Sep 2013 15:42:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qc0-x22f.google.com (mail-qc0-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c01::22f]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A417521F9371 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Tue, 3 Sep 2013 15:41:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qc0-f175.google.com with SMTP id v2so571749qcr.20 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Tue, 03 Sep 2013 15:41:53 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=from:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:subject:date:message-id :to:mime-version; bh=iUucTSSvD//xv1YXE3TV9/psmUKfHiLeuk2NS8BZPe0=; b=nN/tHZqcHwHhiGIvHFPcIj6FgE6IsdDF5OOIPalhgqEYkHrmFGufKtFx89lt2dEG0j GiikwmxR63shm7vytXzwquC5iaaY5+KzWlkNf3Jn4VeyYwtVBaJy4R8w/YZZisGpviZD +MxNGp8wskftD6y4RjUA3lY6S/BWacPi0SoYYfn+xJe93WYcx2agrK9ZveAqId2j73FI rVTvYXEYeCw+ReBt3nn/OWs/yG9NoYNSAi4v62GoqnBXr3OfRGjFbjgSFBuV22SA+tXr sOgC8x9NWIRp+pAS/nFx+x1cnMk1Deu+WT01aMonpaTSewj0ujKihanGUZqnOdtIGR1o xWlQ==
X-Received: by 10.224.161.76 with SMTP id q12mr3592056qax.92.1378248113864; Tue, 03 Sep 2013 15:41:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.30.20.13] (pool-96-255-149-117.washdc.fios.verizon.net. [96.255.149.117]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id p10sm29131284qat.10.1969.12.31.16.00.00 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 03 Sep 2013 15:41:53 -0700 (PDT)
From: RJ Atkinson <rja.lists@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: Detailed review of Significance of IPv6 Interface Identifiers
Date: Tue, 03 Sep 2013 18:41:52 -0400
Message-Id: <F4371D6F-AD0B-4288-AD4D-182E9BCE612B@gmail.com>
To: ipv6@ietf.org
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1283)
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1283)
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: Tue, 03 Sep 2013 22:42:19 -0000

All,

I'd like to see Ray Hunter's proposed text added
to the I-D, rather than having it summarised.

I find the detail quite useful.  Honestly, it is a more clear
justification/motivation for this significant specification 
change than anything else I've yet seen.  So I believe that 
most other readers also would find that detail useful.

In short, I disagree with Brian's inclination to summarise
Ray's text, rather than include it, and I concur with Ray
Hunter's proposal.

I'd also like to see the various IEEE 802 references 
mentioned in Ray's text get cited formally as References.

One of the key points in Ray's text is that duplicate
IIDs "very likely [ will be ] interfering with link-layer
transmission" -- something that often seems to be overlooked
by folks analysing the duplicate IID scenarios.

Yours,

Ran

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email