IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

Nick Hilliard <nick@foobar.org> Wed, 19 July 2017 13:51 UTC

Return-Path: <nick@foobar.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 6379012F268 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 19 Jul 2017 06:51:56 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.201
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.201 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=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 pUmv_3GOZ9km for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 19 Jul 2017 06:51:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.netability.ie (mail.netability.ie [IPv6:2a03:8900:0:100::5]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6CD1C131D17 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Wed, 19 Jul 2017 06:51:54 -0700 (PDT)
X-Envelope-To: ipv6@ietf.org
Received: from cupcake.local (089-101-195156.ntlworld.ie [89.101.195.156] (may be forged)) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.netability.ie (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id v6JDpmqR002319 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 19 Jul 2017 14:51:49 +0100 (IST) (envelope-from nick@foobar.org)
X-Authentication-Warning: cheesecake.ibn.ie: Host 089-101-195156.ntlworld.ie [89.101.195.156] (may be forged) claimed to be cupcake.local
Message-ID: <596F63F4.9010501@foobar.org>
Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2017 14:51:48 +0100
From: Nick Hilliard <nick@foobar.org>
User-Agent: Postbox 5.0.15 (Macintosh/20170609)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: David Farmer <farmer@umn.edu>
CC: IPv6 List <ipv6@ietf.org>, Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: <draft-ietf-6man-rfc4291bis-09.txt>
References: <20150804195752.5065.13523.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <5AB14F48-2799-4A86-830D-E8A89CCADAAC@gmail.com> <CAKD1Yr0Bt4hhBvtSVWrLpns4odzek3U5WJkuQoS1NGsPozW0sg@mail.gmail.com> <CAN-Dau3vVREsYc4Y6AAdDpLKsMjwH_2saS7JTn8P6fRDXRKV7Q@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAN-Dau3vVREsYc4Y6AAdDpLKsMjwH_2saS7JTn8P6fRDXRKV7Q@mail.gmail.com>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.2.3
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/EOMMvD6lW9BTpg0ihF1Hk0FAedw>
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: Wed, 19 Jul 2017 13:51:56 -0000

David Farmer wrote:
> 2. The fact that some components of IPv6 are architecturally based on
> 64bit IIDs doesn't mean that operationally IIDs are always required to
> be 64 bits.

this is certainly implied by the current text in -09.

> Rather than implying that operationally IID are required to
> be 64bits, how about simply stating that operationally 64 bit IIDs are
> recommended. This eliminates the need to enumerate all the exceptions,
> which probably isn't something an architectural document should be doing.

This would be a good way of dealing with this issue and you're correct
to state that enumerating exceptions is something that ought to be
avoided in architectural documents.

Nick

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email