nanog mailing list archives
Re: IPV6 planning
From: Baldur Norddahl <baldur.norddahl () gmail com>
Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2016 05:23:01 +0100
On 8 March 2016 at 01:01, Alarig Le Lay <alarig () swordarmor fr> wrote:
It’s not exactly specific to Windows, dhcpcd use a something like that (my IPv6 is 2a00:5884:8316:2653:fd40:d47d:556f:c426). And at least, there is a RFC related to that, https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7217.
It appears that RFC 7217 does not actually demand a 64 bit interface identifier. One could therefore do a non-64 bit RFC 7217 SLAAC on operating systems that support that. "We note that [RFC4291] requires that the Interface IDs of all unicast addresses (except those that start with the binary value 000) be 64 bits long. However, the method discussed in this document could be employed for generating Interface IDs of any arbitrary length, albeit at the expense of reduced entropy (when employing Interface IDs smaller than 64 bits)." Regards, Baldur
Current thread:
- Re: IPV6 planning, (continued)
- Re: IPV6 planning Saku Ytti (Mar 06)
- Re: IPV6 planning Tore Anderson (Mar 06)
- Re: IPV6 planning Karl Auer (Mar 06)
- Re: IPV6 planning Baldur Norddahl (Mar 06)
- Re: IPV6 planning Karl Auer (Mar 06)
- Re: IPV6 planning Owen DeLong (Mar 07)
- Re: IPV6 planning Alarig Le Lay (Mar 07)
- Re: IPV6 planning Owen DeLong (Mar 07)
- Re: IPV6 planning Bjørn Mork (Mar 08)
- Re: IPV6 planning Enno Rey (Mar 08)
- Re: IPV6 planning Baldur Norddahl (Mar 07)