IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: draft-bourbaki-6man-classless-ipv6-00

otroan@employees.org Tue, 13 June 2017 20:44 UTC

Return-Path: <otroan@employees.org>
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 857541294DB for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 13:44:10 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.001
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=employees.org; domainkeys=pass (1024-bit key) header.from=otroan@employees.org header.d=employees.org
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 7I9d82zc-RaX for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 13:44:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from esa01.kjsl.com (esa01.kjsl.com [IPv6:2607:7c80:54:3::87]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 16356128768 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 13:44:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from cowbell.employees.org ([198.137.202.74]) by esa01.kjsl.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 13 Jun 2017 20:44:07 +0000
Received: from cowbell.employees.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cowbell.employees.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7996AD788D; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 13:44:07 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=employees.org; h=from :message-id:content-type:mime-version:subject:date:in-reply-to :cc:to:references; s=selector1; bh=qheKOTaF1fy6Gjq0mkRDQNkCGmc=; b= eSKHJOSr8G2VEOSstPUpdJ5BsJQfi27XnpLh6LWvu8X4JnVcqBZ/mJqdb6wEHK0k ubz0pAq5MY8ntlxz9lHfz00nwaFXQy8RKemzHQOT1nFwgHFmwpyzwKy8X9UQIGBb K6Sv5dZI7FWX4yVTYIqo5N/l1Hke0GbePIeOP2shhvU=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=employees.org; h=from :message-id:content-type:mime-version:subject:date:in-reply-to :cc:to:references; q=dns; s=selector1; b=RWHoitCztPkJoQvfqdoXGB9 K/bqBAw4mi28hFz+JhfT0+EFzM9IC/vL2gpCzyqLsa3b9Qst3np6Of34kwfUt7xl zN+RLfw/I4k+k3ruRog2bUwgLOho1sl6TcqzGDHbDjaa/xSscborgaDBxYP7/5Os Ug5MbfnnsRVgrq+SRPmQ=
Received: from h.hanazo.no (96.51-175-103.customer.lyse.net [51.175.103.96]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: otroan) by cowbell.employees.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 458F7D788A; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 13:44:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [IPv6:::1] (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by h.hanazo.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F489D39643E; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 22:44:04 +0200 (CEST)
From: otroan@employees.org
Message-Id: <26A08B05-C0A8-438B-90CB-57BC102050B5@employees.org>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_74A96AC8-F846-4280-8BD1-9F1F257A2577"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha512"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.3 \(3273\))
Subject: Re: draft-bourbaki-6man-classless-ipv6-00
Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2017 22:44:04 +0200
In-Reply-To: <01b8e1d6-125c-2ecb-6888-e7283f3d488b@gmail.com>
Cc: Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@google.com>, Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com>, 6man WG <ipv6@ietf.org>
To: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
References: <20170602141112.x64nleqclygz7dwd@Vurt.local> <CAKD1Yr3ppM0UF8HoN8PgS7F0iEmK26ebiuJK=tkAdZnuLWpkZg@mail.gmail.com> <CAKFn1SHASt34ihJmGN0iRFQQzLTMspZfxXHgBjBatXXcRYF4cw@mail.gmail.com> <20170604093119.nt733rb3ymmjssww@Vurt.local> <m1dHTLx-0000DcC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net> <CAKD1Yr0ZZwRar6D-2bkXBKPYehqqW99+BMtDOjyovR8WDXKzxw@mail.gmail.com> <CAD6AjGTjikAWutcenW8qn7OW8kPM9c_x_yDUy5vQxJmXKL85dg@mail.gmail.com> <91c3c0f4-eb8b-cdf7-b9c9-7d1eecb7fe64@gmail.com> <CAKD1Yr0_WR_TB+OC0U1Qt2h6WzUp9EGvrqC1ZKW2mwFeBd3bCQ@mail.gmail.com> <4021a559-5b6d-b3fb-19cd-afbe9041e8f2@gmail.com> <34A29D4D-3670-40BC-B62E-85C4EABC55D5@employees.org> <6e03e25e-fd6a-6311-390e-4834281a76f7@si6networks.com> <1B580CBB-B29D-4860-9EC8-BECD1D5E0006@employees.org> <4b2f5200-86a1-7711-e5ff-7436572be467@gmail.com> <E02C4C99-155A-4358-A845-F00F8BB071C1@employees.org> <b3ca5271-21b1-ab33-2dff-82735ebe9128@gmail.com> <CAKD1Yr0_AASvg0mGb+tEi4bKoF43FA7_MxhRLSHeniAKrj5t1A@mail.gmail.com> <01b8e1d6-125c-2ecb-6888-e7283f3d488b@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3273)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/4Mc0wyx30fbjEdxjWW5kdEb_ZjY>
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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, 13 Jun 2017 20:44:10 -0000

Brian,

>> We have a popular implementation that only accepts 64-bit IID lengths in
>> certain cases. Are you proposing that our implementation change or not?
> 
> No. But if some new link technology comes along for which there is a good
> technical argument for, say, 60 bit interface identifiers, wouldn't you
> want to accommodate it? (I have no idea what that argument might be.)

After we stopped recommending using link-layer addresses in the IID, I have a hard time seeing why a new data-link layer would have requirements for a particular length of the IID. Now if a link-layer is designed that requires to embed link-layer addresses, then sure, but that link-layer is then limited enough to be treated as a special case anyhow.

Ole

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email