Status of the "u" bit for privacy extensions
Florent Fourcot <ietf@flo.fourcot.fr> Tue, 18 February 2014 10:02 UTC
Return-Path: <ietf@flo.fourcot.fr>
X-Original-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5D8681A0651 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 18 Feb 2014 02:02:13 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.099
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.548, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 VwODrfopYCJR for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 18 Feb 2014 02:02:09 -0800 (PST)
Received: from olfflo.fourcot.fr (fourcot.fr [IPv6:2001:4b98:dc0:41:216:3eff:fe52:be3b]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 60C071A064B for <6man@ietf.org>; Tue, 18 Feb 2014 02:02:09 -0800 (PST)
Received: from reglisse.fourcot.fr (dud31.inf.tu-dresden.de [141.76.46.31]) (Authenticated sender: reglisse) by olfflo.fourcot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id AB8932DFBD for <6man@ietf.org>; Tue, 18 Feb 2014 11:02:05 +0100 (CET)
Received: from [IPv6:::1] (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by reglisse.fourcot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4EFDB808FF5 for <6man@ietf.org>; Tue, 18 Feb 2014 11:02:05 +0100 (CET)
Message-ID: <53032F9D.50203@flo.fourcot.fr>
Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2014 11:02:05 +0100
From: Florent Fourcot <ietf@flo.fourcot.fr>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20131103 Icedove/17.0.10
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: 6man@ietf.org
Subject: Status of the "u" bit for privacy extensions
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/nrvrPxB6wE2dIZG6-b7P7hHL0j4
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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, 18 Feb 2014 10:02:13 -0000
Hello, the RFC 7136 has removed/clarify the significance of bits in interface identifier for future iids generation, but it does not include any reference to some current iids generation. For example, the RFC 4941 asks to set the bit 6 to zero: http://tools.ietf.org/search/rfc4941#section-3.2.1 Should current implementations following this rule to be updated? What is the current rule for this? Regards, -- Florent.
- Re: Status of the "u" bit for privacy extensions Florent Fourcot
- Re: Status of the "u" bit for privacy extensions Brian E Carpenter
- Status of the "u" bit for privacy extensions Florent Fourcot
- Re: Status of the "u" bit for privacy extensions Fernando Gont
- Status of the "u" bit for privacy extensions Florent Fourcot
- Re: Status of the "u" bit for privacy extensions Fernando Gont