Re: Fwd: IPv6 Unicast Address Assignment Considerations

[Pekka Savola <pekkas@netcore.fi>]

On Sun, 5 Mar 2006, Gunter Van de Velde (gvandeve) wrote:
> Resend of original message as i apparently did not reach the overall v6ops 
> alias.
....

Overall, I liked this doc.  This would seem to be the logical place to 
put in the critical bits (if any) from Jordi's point-to-point doc, as 
well.

A few small comments,

- in section 2.1, "allocation" should be "assignment"
- in secyion 2.4.1, the HD-ratio for v6 is for *sites* not addresses 
like in v4
- the embedded-RP part was already commented on.
- in section 4.3, there's an uppercase SHOULD for CGA regeneration, 
but this kind of doc shouldn't use uppercase keywords
- in section 4.3, CGA's aren't really indistinguishable, because if 
you know (or guess) the public key of the sender, you can verify who 
it belongs to.. but for many purposes, these have similar properties.
 - section 4.4, as above, you shouldn't need to mention embedded-RP 
reserved addresses.  These are not reserved by default: it's the local 
admin's decition whether to put an RP at one of those interface-ID's, 
so they be used freely (though I'd advise that hosts still shouldn't 
use those).





--
Pekka Savola                 "You each name yourselves king, yet the
Netcore Oy                    kingdom bleeds."
Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings