IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Detailed review of Significance of IPv6 Interface Identifiers

Ran Atkinson <ran.atkinson@gmail.com> Tue, 03 September 2013 22:38 UTC

Return-Path: <ran.atkinson@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 3913A21E808A for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 3 Sep 2013 15:38:45 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id DRUQFEbX9uW6 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 3 Sep 2013 15:38:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qa0-x22e.google.com (mail-qa0-x22e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c00::22e]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8894E21F9196 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Tue, 3 Sep 2013 15:38:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qa0-f46.google.com with SMTP id i13so1644300qae.12 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Tue, 03 Sep 2013 15:38:44 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=from:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:subject:date:message-id :to:mime-version; bh=LbjDLonZ7jtr59SIoOABpH1CBAdjtSTFLL4zJbQtP80=; b=07yqFWGtaYTO1HogDOUuH1nkMoaL4sRo9HoqIZh/PbpKPwfrtvV4z6/+TC0i9ACdao 9aycUupuZJV6m7FJTE0oHVPChWIDF7I0fMBseklLWWzLeUwwZeTCBEQnL/x2Bv67sKA0 MkJEloPt7bLfomsj6y+fplEdK+karC3fSRAXzT9hL+r5NLeYBSmeAMMNtxxpfuY8R6gT nvEjhjwhn60Mq7eha58OKzzp7UMMgfNXYu/ClNaoFoykvC3tZ02CJaomOU6cJn4FRuAF Uh/LR6DaDG2IsdYtwzlbQiSVtaYJhfbZtELs09x6DAy4mUOIKVEcQasHIjWhSa9RsHON FZFQ==
X-Received: by 10.224.126.196 with SMTP id d4mr3621065qas.62.1378247924012; Tue, 03 Sep 2013 15:38:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.30.20.13] (pool-96-255-149-117.washdc.fios.verizon.net. [96.255.149.117]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id u8sm29126454qap.4.1969.12.31.16.00.00 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 03 Sep 2013 15:38:43 -0700 (PDT)
From: Ran Atkinson <ran.atkinson@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: Detailed review of Significance of IPv6 Interface Identifiers
Date: Tue, 03 Sep 2013 18:38:41 -0400
Message-Id: <AD30B725-8CAB-47F0-A79F-0BBA93F47FDB@gmail.com>
To: ipv6@ietf.org
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1283)
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1283)
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Tue, 03 Sep 2013 22:38:45 -0000

I'd like to see Ray Hunter's proposed text added
to the I-D, rather than being summarised.

I find the detail quite useful.  Honestly, it is a more clear
justification/motivation for this significant specification 
change than anything else I've yet seen.  So I believe that 
most other readers also would find that detail useful.

In short, I disagree with Brian's inclination to summarise
Ray's text, rather than include it, and I concur with Ray
Hunter's proposal.

Yours,

Ran

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email