Re: Why /64

[Alexandru Petrescu <[e-mail]>]

Le 27/10/2013 16:53, Octavio Alvarez a écrit :
> On 10/27/2013 02:26 AM, Jeroen Massar wrote:
>>> allows privacy,
>>
>> IMHO big nonsense. The company (amongst many others!) you work for uses
>> amongst others cookies to track their people, and if they really bother
>> could even use natural language structure, search query types, and other
>> behavior for breaking this 'privacy'. Also note that even if the last
>> 64bits are random, your company should be more than able to say "oh,
>> there are typically X users in there, it likely is Y"...
>
> Then why deprecate EUI-64?

I think there is a problem in naming that draft.

I think the intention of it is not to deprecate EUI-64 altogether.  If 
I'm not wrong EUI-64 is an IEEE concept that IETF reuses, and thus 6man 
wouldn't have the prerogatives to 'deprecate EUI-64'.

Second, reading through that draft it seemed to me it intended to 
deprecate the use of a hardware address as input into an IP address 
formation mechanism.

I think the draft _would_ allow to devise an IP address generation 
mechanism using an EUI-64 formed from something else which is not a 
hardware address.

But this is the other thread.

Alex


>
>
>