IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] Thoughts on draft-byrne-v6ops-clatip-01

Ross Chandler <ross@eircom.net> Thu, 01 May 2014 08:13 UTC

Return-Path: <ross@eircom.net>
X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A8221A88E1 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 1 May 2014 01:13:32 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.55
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.55 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.651] 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 OkcRDYaotcqN for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 1 May 2014 01:13:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail06.svc.cra.dublin.eircom.net (mail06.svc.cra.dublin.eircom.net [159.134.118.22]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id D648C1A88DE for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Thu, 1 May 2014 01:13:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 40787 messnum 12470400 invoked from network[213.94.190.14/avas02.vendorsvc.cra.dublin.eircom.net]); 1 May 2014 08:13:25 -0000
Received: from avas02.vendorsvc.cra.dublin.eircom.net (213.94.190.14) by mail06.svc.cra.dublin.eircom.net (qp 40787) with SMTP; 1 May 2014 08:13:25 -0000
Received: from [192.168.1.1] ([86.44.181.141]) by avas02.vendorsvc.cra.dublin.eircom.net with Cloudmark Gateway id wYDM1n01E33Sln201YDRJd; Thu, 01 May 2014 09:13:25 +0100
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.2 \(1874\))
From: Ross Chandler <ross@eircom.net>
In-Reply-To: <DA7557DA-C003-4FAC-A1C5-2FAD5BD028EC@cisco.com>
Date: Thu, 01 May 2014 09:12:33 +0100
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <6CF1D618-F8F8-4E3E-832C-7011396138F0@eircom.net>
References: <DA7557DA-C003-4FAC-A1C5-2FAD5BD028EC@cisco.com>
To: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1874)
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/C5eJAB61-BFLTGKR2IN_HCKVNho
Subject: Re: [v6ops] Thoughts on draft-byrne-v6ops-clatip-01
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: v6ops discussion list <v6ops.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/v6ops/>
List-Post: <mailto:v6ops@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 01 May 2014 08:13:32 -0000

On 30 Apr 2014, at 23:48, Fred Baker (fred) <fred@cisco.com> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> 3.  Choosing 192.0.0.0/29
>> 
>> To avoid conflicts with any other network that may communicate with
>> the CLAT, a locally unique address must be assigned.
> 
> Dumb question. Is there a reason to not use 169.254.0.0/16? I don’t suppose you have a MAC address, but if you can pick a number in 0..31, I should think you could pick a number in 0..65535, and you might even have a source for it.

Operationally if I saw an address from 169.254.0.0/16 for the clatd I might think it was in a transition state waiting to get another address assigned instead of it.

Ross

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email