Re: Updated IID length text

[David Farmer <[e-mail]>]

I liked the following in the previous version;

   Note that this value is an arbitrary choice and might be changed for
   some future allocation of unicast address space.

What was the issue with it?

Thanks

On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 6:37 PM, Brian E Carpenter <
[e-mail]> wrote:

> OK, after all that discussion, here is a revised proposal. There is
> nothing new here at all, IMHO; just clarification:
>
> OLD
>    For all unicast addresses, except those that start with the binary
>    value 000, Interface IDs are required to be 64 bits long.  Background
>    on the 64 bit boundary in IPv6 addresses can be found in [RFC7421].
>
> NEW
>    IPv6 routing is based on prefixes of any valid length up to 128
> [BCP198].
>    For example, [RFC6164] standardises 127 bit prefixes on point-to-point
>    links. However, consistent use of Stateless Address Autoconfiguration
>    (SLAAC)[RFC4862] requires that all interfaces on a link use the same
> length
>    of Interface ID. To guarantee interoperability of SLAAC, a fixed length
> of
>    Interface ID is necessary. For all currently allocated unicast
> addresses,
>    except those that start with the binary value 000, Interface IDs are
>    required to be 64 bits long.  Background on the 64 bit boundary in IPv6
>    addresses can be found in [RFC7421].
>
> Regards
>    Brian
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
> [e-mail]
> Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>



-- 
===============================================
David Farmer               Email:[e-mail]
Networking & Telecommunication Services
Office of Information Technology
University of Minnesota
2218 University Ave SE        Phone: [phone]
Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029   Cell: 612-812-9952
===============================================