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

[Philip Homburg <[e-mail]>]

In your letter dated Sun, 4 Jun 2017 07:13:21 -0700 you wrote:
>That is not what we are proposing (in ILA at least). This is not
>intended to work over the Internet. Mobility would be implemented
>within a carrier network, external to that network it is transparent.
>Logically, this provides the same functionality as encapsulation does
>with the benefit of not incurring the overhead of encapsulation.

The current IPv6 address architecture is basically a relatively densely
allocated /64 prefix plus an extremely sparse 64-bit IID.

With DHCPv6 you can today have dense IIDs that allow space for experiments.

However, without a clear consensus that embedding identifiers in IPv6
addresses is good idea, it strikes me as bad to use that as an argument
to change how SLAAC works.

At least for me, messing up the IPv6 address architecure just to save the
overhead of encapsulation is not worth it.