Re: Is 1111 1110 10 equal to 0xfe80 or 0x3fa?

Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com> Mon, 10 June 2019 15:04 UTC

Return-Path: <tom@herbertland.com>
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 F15CE1201B0 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 10 Jun 2019 08:04:40 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.898
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.898 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=herbertland-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com
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 DxBufkucRxha for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 10 Jun 2019 08:04:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ed1-x52b.google.com (mail-ed1-x52b.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::52b]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2B4A31201B7 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Mon, 10 Jun 2019 08:04:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ed1-x52b.google.com with SMTP id k21so11616617edq.3 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Mon, 10 Jun 2019 08:04:38 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=herbertland-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=ST+kDU+/3E5MyU2NDhFbMSPNiIDCwE4CMgSCpJueOJM=; b=i2xSMvLVFzM7SqmI+bpYTEz4XsDFKn3bVl/WaQob7DSJhjSJ1Yozf4yCN84l+M4Nyg 86njjV+2kLuXLFmWGUwWFJMmRyQhYLwrS2GUAaKd9HucgHTwj0+LPwcyqXl+Hkx4VIY+ JOZkX+RxUXN62Aart6HljaulvNtJ4VmkVdZ/GUYwm7fXcCl1usbdEBsw5VznkhYmCOPW zB8FFZJYF9XeKi0YPGczp0WLNKkBIV1BNEYmj88qGgHBNAamcb1w7EqiXlrXtb7tKTzc kKCyXEWUhbx2srs88n/uUG1RvOJhftlkRAMy20+MLcAFr/oXqHZHJTErlEhHhd9mlgbZ dVFg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=ST+kDU+/3E5MyU2NDhFbMSPNiIDCwE4CMgSCpJueOJM=; b=EuSG6xCHI4V9Pg4WT36jKB/mfO+jasxG70mpJVlgvnWSIu/FCgE4naHE9d4EVvIZeE kUU9YAJhu5fbXa3tIhf21OPTYi3lYc7k73jRn3JDL753zePQppoGowV/GuuNgVmEqErH l/imOV22RusjW2YjGjshqx4oECwqfp5hD4NfI+gFSCZclXV4KBz4qF0dbU76iX5BH4iL NmCFKHJ2BU6NP8N1fj/p88JuWjWhtgy4EXQCME+BD4XhDxhipDgMcJwiXyvS27BysswM xUdc6Ckl18PlD9No86x+YU/njdV8Qz/g4NqHWiPkIv9CZvMXBCvxhWpuTvih92hx2Tfy 5Lmg==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAWujENndG5BN0+wGOcb06AJUt+oMWOFi05sHS2jsqkHqdrLnpt5 Ji3G8DLjrMsD+jveCAmgBNquDlr/+uOPe8cwk/4Lvg==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqz62hD75xuEi7U5bD27KpACxW4442R+ZRGwJ20bFD29/oMm6PJdRjvhbnr1Knqgs+fBsl71PFs4KdBjtHJ7/tY=
X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:d193:: with SMTP id c19mr61424956ejz.149.1560179076490; Mon, 10 Jun 2019 08:04:36 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <DM6PR15MB2506E62560613C85F74A1FF8BB100@DM6PR15MB2506.namprd15.prod.outlook.com> <CALx6S36vVpD9bAPSBQmhV+daR0Yr4heQ-LaiB4hABAs8ofVfNQ@mail.gmail.com> <DM6PR15MB25063BAF058C1825E2B63E30BB130@DM6PR15MB2506.namprd15.prod.outlook.com>
In-Reply-To: <DM6PR15MB25063BAF058C1825E2B63E30BB130@DM6PR15MB2506.namprd15.prod.outlook.com>
From: Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com>
Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2019 08:04:25 -0700
Message-ID: <CALx6S37HsHyGwvXfWEjWHUrbnepLGbwp1Z64dbNK43kv4L33EQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Is 1111 1110 10 equal to 0xfe80 or 0x3fa?
To: "Mudric, Dusan (Dusan)" <dmudric@avaya.com>
Cc: "ipv6@ietf.org" <ipv6@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/QjtPjzmisX2W3Ipgro2NB-Tg-Wo>
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Mon, 10 Jun 2019 15:04:41 -0000

On Mon, Jun 10, 2019 at 6:58 AM Mudric, Dusan (Dusan) <dmudric@avaya.com> wrote:
>
> > On Friday, June 7, 2019 at 3:48 PM Tom Herbert
> > <tom@herbertland.com> wrote
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Message: 3
> > > > Date: Fri, 7 Jun 2019 10:53:28 -0700
> > > > From: Fred Baker <fredbaker.ietf@gmail.com>
> > > > To: Alexandre Petrescu <alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com>
> > > > Cc: IPv6 <ipv6@ietf.org>
> > > > Subject: Re: Is 1111 1110 10 equal to 0xfe80 or 0x3fa?
> > > > Message-ID: <A722E202-7671-4111-BA92-8A67B3D3B924@gmail.com>
> > > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > If I have prefix fe80::/10, as described in RFC 4291, the next bit
> > > > is bit 11. Doing the same subdivision of the prefix is fe80::/11 and
> > fea0::/11.
> > > [Dusan] The hexadecimal definition for LL address is not syntactically
> > correct. The binary 10 bit prefix 1111111010 cannot be presented as
> > hexadecimal FE80::/10. It is rather a range FE80::/10 - FEBF::/10. In this
> > notation, FE80::/10 = FEBF::/10,  because the first 10 bits are equal and other
> > 6 should be ignored. 111 1111010 can be defined as FE80::/10 only if every
> > time it is also mentioned that the trailing 6 bits are all zero.
> >
> > By that logic, we'd have to mention that the trailing 118 bits are zero.  E.g.
> > FE80::/10 == FEBD:F676:BBBB:C654:FEBD:F676:BBBB:C654/10
> > also. It's obviously convenient canonical notication to express all the trailing
> > bits as zeroes for a prefix, but not required. For instance, ifconfig shows my
> > host address as fe80::ac2f:ea58:94a:438/64 which in one string indicates both
> > a fully qualified address and it's prefix bits.
> [Dusan] In this example fe80::ac2f:ea58:94a:438/64 is LL address with 0xfe80 0x0000 0x0000 0x0000 prefix. Based on LL prefix definition, this LL address can have a value of feab::ac2f:ea58:94a:438/64 and still have the binary 10 bit prefix 1111111010
>
> May be LL address can be defined in hex notation as a range FE8::/10 - FEB::/10? This range always has the same well know LL identifier, the binary 10 bit prefix 1111111010.

FE8::/10 - FEB::/10, only three digits in IPv6 notation? So wouldn't
FE8::/10 == 0FE8::/10 == 0FE0::/10 == FE0::/10. I don't think that's
right.

Tom

>
> >
> > Tom
> >