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

Yucel Guven <yucel.guven@gmail.com> Mon, 10 June 2019 15:06 UTC

Return-Path: <yucel.guven@gmail.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 74B8E12012C for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 10 Jun 2019 08:06:21 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.998
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.998 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.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 qV6dJ7_yUDEe for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 10 Jun 2019 08:06:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ot1-x334.google.com (mail-ot1-x334.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::334]) (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 9A3E0120020 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Mon, 10 Jun 2019 08:06:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ot1-x334.google.com with SMTP id l15so8578413otn.9 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Mon, 10 Jun 2019 08:06:18 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=fGBUQlcSK5Z0D15X8qFTLS6quCfrEI+qa5UqceLQ2wQ=; b=aZkwiCyBJ05sYcIq+27FbQMlUXHFSCvsoBnueHZyxinSbHTl2HmYnB8MYEFUI/yFMa w7ysTUMM0mPmIUvC3mppoKdi+wfYVQfEA8CdYAzZDkvZC6jSn4Z1R9trsxqOuks5x12E Uvvo+z5af669kK+XKPt1dYlfS7nc424KJO4Dq55MlEquh8zGXlJIkVyRuZZYjs07hFSv w/CWNUSutGZDA+1l8JHWIBgD9rCjRF4DI3sRwxkZtHzVRzJ+EmFotbjDNSzTe4dyKHGZ 4raZDSdP7i3yvNEE/YPHO30QXAwW1nrNMa3sH7EOJumEmIBpiDxEbx+Q+Mjg0je8F18x oYag==
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=fGBUQlcSK5Z0D15X8qFTLS6quCfrEI+qa5UqceLQ2wQ=; b=PCDX+TL1A2ELXyIQQGo0G4JJ9+g929NMffXO5qpzScr4mzLIp/Dv4qXPV+jXYXOLWn RmTD3aZjrcs9sa8BMqZ66vuyFODnpFY+RqNAFcemFcXX8iM07b96R9knGFWlIZAIuxmV o7Ox4udnRpSfN/E4VHa0T9SfTw/Cki8Dkgz+H0rlTFow5aMiXyKxbzWNo/INqkikI2RF wG3jP6QWNEs291sFtwKRyHYrdu6MzKIhnh93IVpsw78WFud+QwDIsBTyCS3Qn0D1nD5i a57AXRRfE3Gvx4TrJH/3w/v7kAiCbomb9ynTdbCQY+mONIIHSdXiJRE7FvE4r/ifkIJ2 WxDg==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAXwS2QuzVKmShQ2o952pTzMblDagycQf90shcO6ao8H0fv6CJWe 0aG6pglCBxgHY8Fx3nVLGlauNAHZk6cIk0gz3q8=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqyDY2lAx31DHF3Xzy1ThmThwIRKbSS+/l8X2rwbdYnHxIP4sQoA9JcD+WHbOAJ4MLFoSd2J7j90928KGKT4M2Y=
X-Received: by 2002:a9d:6d06:: with SMTP id o6mr30078591otp.225.1560179177963; Mon, 10 Jun 2019 08:06:17 -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: Yucel Guven <yucel.guven@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2019 18:06:02 +0200
Message-ID: <CAKQ4NaWGyaDZnVb4t2qiq0o_9fYVDM3jAqPWxrwDB=Ci92AtNQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Is 1111 1110 10 equal to 0xfe80 or 0x3fa?
To: "Mudric, Dusan (Dusan)" <dmudric@avaya.com>
Cc: Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com>, "ipv6@ietf.org" <ipv6@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000b04691058af98599"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/aIyeUqlxEoVBqUiCZVD8XzcwUg4>
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 15:06:22 -0000

FE8::/10 ?  It is different from FE80::/10. Did you mistype?

Writing the prefix 'FE8::/10' is equal to the prefix '0FE8::/10',  which
are completely different.

On Mon, Jun 10, 2019 at 3:58 PM 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.
>
> >
> > Tom
> >
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
> ipv6@ietf.org
> Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>