IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

otroan@employees.org Tue, 06 June 2017 21:03 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 250301200B9 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 6 Jun 2017 14:03:38 -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 9zytOi2QtF_L for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 6 Jun 2017 14:03:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from esa01.kjsl.com (esa01.kjsl.com [IPv6:2607:7c80:54:3::87]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A47AD129527 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Tue, 6 Jun 2017 14:03:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from cowbell.employees.org ([198.137.202.74]) by esa01.kjsl.com with ESMTP; 06 Jun 2017 21:03:36 +0000
Received: from cowbell.employees.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cowbell.employees.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 60D30D788D; Tue, 6 Jun 2017 14:03:36 -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=YvKUsKjF1o7bBwMwYIiM4Ftqkx8=; b= MfrrcWIZ5X1P7cHMK6CFyO7ogKl7bZABrSRTJd47cUmNEYHh8Qs711poMOXdRDH+ kaO1hiCompH7sHekLjLeAAckHnHknC2rx6QlbWD6B4/T51ZuFHVG/IE9CNye8Nqo zLnBLQACRP0+tdbRxwOYqbWEoQ/o5jZXIKoTXpvVnFA=
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=kQ2ynOIYoSSiqCNyy0YPoHk vLAln1n6uw6Yf2NjA1J+htEGYH54uKrLKzci3Fk7iIpW+W36HZo3xuHAkND4ZzeX AXNKTNdIsjQmkyeXraYocj0ArPIPxXkfurpdU6MeHchyQD956/vaTu4VYtw9QZdI gZXvj2irZHuMIBd2wucY=
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 2D514D788B; Tue, 6 Jun 2017 14:03:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [IPv6:::1] (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by h.hanazo.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id A8EEECDFA1AF; Tue, 6 Jun 2017 23:03:34 +0200 (CEST)
From: otroan@employees.org
Message-Id: <89A69730-B9F3-49B4-942D-EB664A728BDD@employees.org>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_06BCE1B8-C2B1-4F94-900A-64D60055BB8B"; 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, 06 Jun 2017 23:03:33 +0200
In-Reply-To: <780257e6-749e-ad9b-4d7a-08e39f46fd1c@gmail.com>
Cc: Erik Kline <ek@google.com>, 6man WG <ipv6@ietf.org>
To: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
References: <20170602141112.x64nleqclygz7dwd@Vurt.local> <20170602141259.GD30896@gir.theapt.org> <CAKD1Yr0DtQYvCYLQexhXe_nhb5rjeyhnB4bCveqyO5Xbuwdg1A@mail.gmail.com> <CAKFn1SEdjhsQ3tKPZdbdfF4ArDzw-FZfjQT68gV55Fc-5vzBvw@mail.gmail.com> <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> <CAAedzxppjnBhVAHF4L4B7WTtwxPGhpOv8ruXOhm=zGwjQ5-OsA@mail.gmail.com> <780257e6-749e-ad9b-4d7a-08e39f46fd1c@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3273)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/PN1w70e8UqfzDMHS0JBiNYWA3qQ>
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, 06 Jun 2017 21:03:38 -0000

>> The only thing meaningfully affected by removing 64bit IIDs...
> 
> But that is exactly what the draft does *not* do. Nobody would
> change a single instruction in existing code as a result of this
> draft. (I agree with you that some O/S stacks may need fixing, but
> they already need fixing.)

is this draft exactly:

   IPv6 unicast routing is based on prefixes of any valid length up to
   128 [BCP198].  Interface Identifiers should be 64 bit long except
   when the addresses are manually configured, or by exceptions defined
   in standards track documents.  For example, [RFC6164] standardises
   127 bit prefixes on inter-router point-to-point links.  The rationale
   for using 64 bit Interface Identifiers can be found in [RFC7421]

?

Ole

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email