Re: IPv6 Firewire - fffe (was: what problem is solved by proscribing non-64 bit prefixes?)
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: IPv6 Firewire - fffe (was: what problem is solved by proscribing non-64 bit prefixes?)
- To: michael.dillon at bt.com
- Subject: Re: IPv6 Firewire - fffe (was: what problem is solved by proscribing non-64 bit prefixes?)
- From: Alexandru Petrescu <alexandru.petrescu at gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 03 Oct 2008 22:04:21 +0200
- Cc: ksherman at mitre.org, ipv6 at ietf.org, pekkas at netcore.fi, rbonica at juniper.net, Steve_Eiserman at ao.uscourts.gov, Pasi.Eronen at nokia.com, cemartin at mitre.org, draft-ietf-v6ops-addcon at tools.ietf.org, ralph.liguori at disa.mil, night at nist.gov, dougm at nist.gov, v6ops-chairs at tools.ietf.org, brian.e.carpenter at gmail.com
- Delivered-to: ietfarch-ipv6-web-archive at core3.amsl.com
- Delivered-to: ipv6 at core3.amsl.com
- In-reply-to: <48E5F1B7.6010307 at gmail.com>
- List-archive: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/private/ipv6>
- List-help: <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
- List-id: "IPv6 Maintenance Working Group \(6man\)" <ipv6.ietf.org>
- List-post: <mailto:ipv6@ietf.org>
- List-subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
- List-unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
- References: <C0F2465B4F386241A58321C884AC7ECC08696C2F at E03MVZ2-UKDY.domain1.systemhost.net> <48E5F1B7.6010307 at gmail.com>
- Sender: ipv6-bounces at ietf.org
- User-agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.17 (Windows/20080914)
Michael, allow me following up my own email. Re the question about
implementations of IPv6 over Firewire, I wanted to refine it.
I think some implementations of IPv6 over Firewire may still waste these
fffe bits, still questioning the point of 64-bit EUI-64 (instead of say
48bit).
(googling some earlier discussion on web [*]):
$ ifconfig fw0
^^^
fw0: flags=8863<UP,BROADCAST,SMART,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> mtu 2030
inet6 fe80::21c:b3ff:fe7c:d17a%fw0 prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x5
^^^^^
lladdr 00:1c:b3:ff:fe:7c:d1:7a
^^^^^
The refined question would thus be: would there be some IPv6 over
Firewire implementation which wouldn't waste these fffe bits?
(sorry for the questioning style of mails, I'm just humbly trying to see
whether I'm completely off with these fffe lost bits).
Alex
[*] http://lists.apple.com/archives/ipv6-dev/2007/Dec/msg00001.html
Alexandru Petrescu wrote:
michael.dillon at bt.com wrote:
I'm aware of several IEEE link layers and none uses 64bit addresses.
IEEE tries to have them all 48bit. Even non-IEEE (like USB) tries to
be 48bit.
Have you ever heard of EUI-64?
<http://standards.ieee.org/regauth/oui/tutorials/EUI64.html>
Well yes, good pointer.
One notable IEEE protocol which uses EUI-64 is Firewire (IEEE 1394). For
more info see RFC 3146.
Thanks for this pointer too. I must ack I've not experimented IPv6 nor
IPv4 over Firewire. Are there some implementations of IPv6 over Firewire?
Alex
______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email
______________________________________________________________________
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
ipv6 at ietf.org
Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: Messages sent to this list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.