Re: [Fwd: I-D Action: draft-carpenter-6man-why64-00.txt]

Le 06/01/2014 17:07, Templin, Fred L a écrit :
> Hello Brian and co-authors,
>
> The draft looks good to me. In Section 3, paragraph 3, please
> add ISATAP [RFC5214] and AERO [I-D.templin-aerolink] to the
> list of "IPv6-over-foo" documents.

Hi Fred,

Yes, IID of ISATAP RFC5214 reads as fixed 64bit long, and should be cited.

However, I am not sure ISATAP would apply to be an 'IPv6-over-foo' 
document.  Rather a v4-v6 transition mechanism?  If yes we have this 
text that could  be augmented with ISATAP reference:
>    IPv6 transition mechanisms such as NAT64 and NPTv6, as well as Basic
>    transition and Teredo rely on the use of IIDs of length 64.

On another hand,  draft-templin-aerolink-00.txt seems to be an 
IPv6-over-foo document.  I need to read this part more to better 
understand the suggestion. I will come back.

Thanks for the suggestion.

Alex

>
> Thanks - Fred
> fred.l.templin@boeing.com
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: ipv6 [mailto:ipv6-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Brian E Carpenter
>> Sent: Sunday, January 05, 2014 2:07 PM
>> To: 6man
>> Subject: [Fwd: I-D Action: draft-carpenter-6man-why64-00.txt]
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> A group of us put this together following a discussion some weeks
>> ago on the v6ops list about the 64-bit boundary in IPv6 addresses.
>> Discussion belongs in 6man, please.
>>
>> This draft is incomplete but we'd welcome input. Let me underline
>> an important comment in the introduction:
>>
>>    _The purpose of this document is to analyse the issues around this
>>     question.  We make no proposal for change, but we do analyse the
>>     possible effects of a change._
>>
>>
>>     Brian + co-authors
>>
>> -------- Original Message --------
>> Subject: I-D Action: draft-carpenter-6man-why64-00.txt
>> Date: Sun, 05 Jan 2014 13:59:17 -0800
>> From: internet-drafts@ietf.org
>> Reply-To: internet-drafts@ietf.org
>> To: i-d-announce@ietf.org
>>
>>
>> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
>>
>>
>>          Title           : Analysis of the 64-bit Boundary in IPv6 Addressing
>>          Authors         : Brian Carpenter
>>                            Tim Chown
>>                            Fernando Gont
>>                            Sheng Jiang
>>                            Alexandru Petrescu
>>                            Andrew Yourtchenko
>> 	Filename        : draft-carpenter-6man-why64-00.txt
>> 	Pages           : 14
>> 	Date            : 2014-01-05
>>
>> Abstract:
>>     The IPv6 unicast addressing format includes a separation between the
>>     prefix used to route packets to a subnet and the interface identifier
>>     used to specify a given interface connected to that subnet.
>>     Historically the interface identifier has been defined as 64 bits
>>     long, leaving 64 bits for the prefix.  This document discusses the
>>     reasons for this fixed boundary and the issues involved in treating
>>     it as a variable boundary.
>>
>>
>> The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-carpenter-6man-why64/
>>
>> There's also a htmlized version available at:
>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-carpenter-6man-why64-00
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
>> ipv6@ietf.org
>> Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
> ipv6@ietf.org
> Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>