Re: [v6ops] [E] New Version Notification for draft-mishra-v6ops-variable-slaac-problem-stmt-01.txt

[Alexandre Petrescu <[e-mail]>]

Le 05/11/2020 à 22:49, Bob Hinden a écrit :
> Alexandre,
> 
>> On Nov 5, 2020, at 10:15 AM, Alexandre Petrescu
>> <[e-mail]> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>>> or "Arbitrary Length Interface Identifiers - A Problem Statement"
>>> (both "subnet prefix" and "interface identifier" are a concept
>>> defined in the address architecture).
>> 
>> But who uses Interface Identifiers?  Only SLAAC, I think.
>> 
> 
> That is not correct.   All IPv6 unicast addresses have Interface
> IDs.

Maybe I can try to say that an 64bit IID is made of a sub-IID1 and a
sub-IID2?

In this way, an IID would still be 64bit length, but the Variable SLAAC
would form an address in a different way: it would use a super-prefix
constructed of the prefix received in RA to which the sub-IID1 would be
appended.  This Variable SLAAC would finally append the sub-IID1 to the
super-prefix to form a 128bit IPv6 address.

This be in agreement with IID 64bit of RFC4291, I think?

Alex


   For example from RFC4291:
> 
> 2.5.4.  Global Unicast Addresses
> 
> The general format for IPv6 Global Unicast addresses is as follows:
> 
> |         n bits         |   m bits  |       128-n-m bits         | 
> +------------------------+-----------+----------------------------+ |
> global routing prefix  | subnet ID |       interface ID         | 
> +------------------------+-----------+----------------------------+
> 
> This is independent of how they are allocated (SLAAC, DHCP, manual).
> 
> Please reread RFC4291.
> 
> Bob
> 
> 
>