Re: Question about RFC6724

[Philip Homburg <[e-mail]>]

>> In the context of RFC 6724, can you give an example where limiting the
>> CommonPrefixLen to 64 gives the wrong result?
>
>If read that way, it means that all IPv4-mapped addresses match each other
>at /64. I'm sure that isn't the intention and I very much doubt that any
>implementation does that. See my reply to Fred Templin.

If it is obviously wrong, then it should be possible to give an example
where RFC 6724 gives the wrong results. 

Any material change in RFC 6724, would basically be us (6man) trying to define
address selection for IPv4. 

There is a reason the common prefix len is now limited to 64. The same
reasoning applies to IPv4 (i.e., just comparing all address bits is as wrong
for IPv4 as it is for IPv6).