Actually, in addition to your text there still needs to be a recommendation
for 64 bit IIDs in all other cases. 64 bit IIDs are(and should remain) the
norm for IPv6, I do not want to change that. But the current language say
IIDs are always 64 bit except when an address begins with binary 000,
leaving no room for any other exception. And this is plainly incorrect, I
provided two clear exceptions that are already standardized. Furthermore,
IIDs other than 64 bits are in operational use, with manual configuration
and DHCPv6.
So I'd suggest;
However, the Interface ID of unicast addresses used for
Stateless Address Autoconfiguration [RFC4862] is required
to be 64 bits long, in all other cases it is recommended to
be 64 bits long.
The other option is to enumerate all the exceptions, requiring the document
to be updated every time a new exception is standardized.
On Mon, Feb 13, 2017 at 4:53 PM, Brian E Carpenter <
brian(_dot_)e(_dot_)carpenter(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com> wrote:
At an earlier stage I suggested restricting the applicability
of the "However..." sentence to SLAAC [RFC4862]. A short way
of doing this would be
However, the Interface ID of unicast addresses used for
Stateless Address Autoconfiguration [RFC4862] is required
to be 64 bits long.
Regards
Brian
On 14/02/2017 11:32, David Farmer wrote:
I have concerns with the following text;
IPv6 unicast routing is based on prefixes of any valid length up to
128 [BCP198]. For example, [RFC6164] standardises 127 bit prefixes
on inter-router point-to-point links. However, the Interface ID of
all unicast addresses, except those that start with the binary value
000, is required to be 64 bits long. The rationale for the 64 bit
boundary in IPv6 addresses can be found in [RFC7421]
The third sentence seems to limit exceptions to 64 bit IIDs to
exclusively
addresses that start with binary vale of 000. There are at least two
other
exceptions from standards track RFCs, that should be more clear accounted
for in this text. First is [RFC6164] point-to-point links, as mentioned
in
the previous sentence. I think the clear intent of [RFC6164] is to allow
one(1) Bit IIDs for point to point-to-point links using any Global
Unicast
Address, not just those that start with 000. Second is, [RFC6052], which
updates [RFC4921] and seems to allow 32 bit IIDs or /96 prefixes for any
Global Unicast Address when used for IPv4/IPv6 translation, referred to
as
""Network-Specific Prefix" unique to the organization deploying the
address
translators," in section 2.2 of [RFC6052].
Thanks.
On Wed, Feb 1, 2017 at 5:51 PM, The IESG
<iesg-secretary(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org>
wrote:
The IESG has received a request from the IPv6 Maintenance WG (6man) to
consider the following document:
- 'IP Version 6 Addressing Architecture'
<draft-ietf-6man-rfc4291bis-07.txt> as Internet Standard
The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits
final comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the
ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org mailing lists by 2017-03-01. Exceptionally,
comments may
be
sent to iesg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org instead. In either case, please retain the
beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting.
Abstract
This specification defines the addressing architecture of the IP
Version 6 (IPv6) protocol. The document includes the IPv6 addressing
model, text representations of IPv6 addresses, definition of IPv6
unicast addresses, anycast addresses, and multicast addresses, and an
IPv6 node's required addresses.
This document obsoletes RFC 4291, "IP Version 6 Addressing
Architecture".
The file can be obtained via
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-6man-rfc4291bis/
IESG discussion can be tracked via
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-6man-rfc4291bis/ballot/
No IPR declarations have been submitted directly on this I-D.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
ipv6(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
ipv6(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------
--
===============================================
David Farmer Email:farmer(_at_)umn(_dot_)edu
Networking & Telecommunication Services
Office of Information Technology
University of Minnesota
2218 University Ave SE Phone: 612-626-0815
Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029 Cell: 612-812-9952
===============================================