nanog mailing list archives

Re: IPV6 planning


From: Baldur Norddahl <baldur.norddahl () gmail com>
Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2016 02:57:44 +0100

Den 6. mar. 2016 13.41 skrev "Karl Auer" <kauer () biplane com au>:

Dunno about "harsh", but RFC 2464, section 4 says that the prefix must
be 64 bits. By (extremely strong) implication, a host must not use a
prefix of any other length to perform SLAAC. I say "extremely strong"
because the entire description of how an IPv6 Ethernet interface
identifier is formed depends on it being composed of the prefix plus an
EUI-64 identifier. Later RFCs firm up the requirement and apply it in
other contexts.

But the most popular OS (Windows) completely ignores all of that and makes
up an identifier not based on EUI-64. Everyone are happy anyway. The RFC
should have let identifier selection as an implementation detail as the
risk of collision is almost non existent given a sufficient random
selection and we have duplicate address detection as a safeguard.

Regards

Baldur


Current thread: