ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-6man-rfc4291bis-07.txt> (IP Version 6 Addressing Architecture) to Internet Standard

2017-02-23 02:13:16
I'm sorry, I'm wondering which word in my recent message that said
"I'm not aware of any generally available running code that will
be changed in even one instruction by the final text - that is indeed
a requirement for advancement to Internet Standard."
is hard to understand.

Help he understand, then. There is widely-deployed code that assumes that
the interface ID is 64 and does not work on anything other than 64 bit
prefix lengths. Currently that code is correct on all unicast space. If you
change RFC 4291, won't that code be incorrect?

Since there are plenty of addresses with non 64bit IIDs in use, isn't
that code by definition *already* broken? I don't see how changing the
4291bis document to reflect operational reality makes the code any
more broken.

Steinar Haug, AS2116

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>