Re: [6bed4-devel] Interface identifiers

[Rick v. R. <ri...@op...>]

Hello Eric,

> I would really appreciate being able to tell a 6bed4 address when I see
> one.  Let me recommend using the format:
> 
> ::64bd:PP:II:II

This would still be guessing, of course, but it would be a useful hint.

Instead of doing this, I am talking to RIPE about a /48 prefix that
can be used in an anycast setup.  Anycast itself is not free from
questions, but we want to try it, and the entire 6bed4 design is
suitable for doing this.

> Using a well known value 64bd makes these 6bed4 addresess easy to spot
> from a mile away, and it makes it clear these are not MAC48 identifiers
> mapped into EUI64 identifiers.

I'd like to show it to the Internet at large, not just within a mile ;-)
and the mapping that you propose overlaps with the EUI64 scheme.  I like
to be able to exploit existing IPv6 stacks (for Ethernet) to simplify
the scheme, which is another way of simplifying the handling.

> The leading value of 64bd also has the nice property that it leaves the
> interface identifer in modified EUI-64 format and has the u and g bits
> clear indicating it is not assigned by IEEE aka universally unique and
> not a multicast group address.

Nice one!

You are almost proposing to revert the addressing scheme back to the way
it was in v00 of the draft.  Interesting.  The reasons for the changes
to the v01 format (EUI64-lookalikes) are here:

http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?thread_name=20120302075921.GB23120%40newphantom.local&forum_name=tun6bed4-devel


Thanks again, more to follow,
 -Rick