Re: [rfc2462bis issue 281] Requirement for 64bit I/F ID

[JINMEI Tatuya / 神明達哉 <jinmei at isl.rdc.toshiba.co.jp>]

>>>>> On Fri, 28 May 2004 23:49:48 -0400, 
>>>>> Keith Moore <moore at cs.utk.edu> said:

>>> Just checking: is this an agreement or a disagreement on the proposed
>>> text for rfc2462bis, or is this just an opinion on the (seemingly)
>>> fixed constant of the IFID/prefix length?
>> 
>>> In any event, the proposed text does not contain a hard-coded "64" and
>>> does contain a note that an implementation should expect a different
>>> length of IFIDs/prefixes than the one currently used.  So I guess you
>>> can live with it.
>> 
>> No responses...I interpreted the silence as a sort of agreement, and
>> I'm going to close this issue with the proposed text.

> If the previous message was sent to me, I missed it.  But yes, I do 
> support the proposed text.

Okay, thanks.

					JINMEI, Tatuya
					Communication Platform Lab.
					Corporate R&D Center, Toshiba Corp.
					jinmei at isl.rdc.toshiba.co.jp

--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
ipv6 at ietf.org
Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------