[140688] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: user-relative names - was:[Re: Yahoo and IPv6]
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu)
Tue May 17 23:39:02 2011
To: Joel Jaeggli <joelja@bogus.com>
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 17 May 2011 20:22:23 PDT."
<2CE23EE9-7BC7-46C6-A2F2-75DDBEFCDBC6@bogus.com>
From: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu
Date: Tue, 17 May 2011 23:37:21 -0400
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
--==_Exmh_1305689841_2811P
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
On Tue, 17 May 2011 20:22:23 PDT, Joel Jaeggli said:
> On May 17, 2011, at 7:51 PM, Scott Weeks wrote:
> > Only if you design your network that way. EUI-64 isn't required.
> don't much matter, if you move around you're going get them a lot.
Of course, if you're moving around and getting EUI-64 addresses via SLAAC, you
can almost certainly use RFC4941 privacy addresses (instead of/in addition to)
your MAC-address based address.
Unless you end up behind a fascist firewall that actually checks that the
EUI-64 half of the SLAAC address actually matches your MAC address - but we all
know that firewalls are weak at IPv6 support, so probably nobody's actually
doing that checking. :)
--==_Exmh_1305689841_2811P
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Exmh version 2.5 07/13/2001
iD8DBQFN0z7xcC3lWbTT17ARAhvwAJ9r5+jTJ4kd3qU8LcVrhlKj/2SgRQCeLRHb
QXq/yahuADTrolwLqUpRnO8=
=6qI2
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--==_Exmh_1305689841_2811P--
