Re: about Wedgelayer 3.5 / Fat IP approaches
Erik Nordmark <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.multi6 |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
> what about cgas? > They are locators, so you can use them for refferals to non multi6 apps > and hosts, they allow to map from id to locators using reverse dns, and > they are crypto in nature > seems a good candidate to me :-) A downside of CGA approaches is that they would, on a global basis, cast the /64 subnet prefix boundary in stone forever. This is different than SeND which only assumes the /64 on a single link, and one can envision SeND evolving to handle different subnet prefix lengths over time. Different people probably have very different level of concern for "/64 forever in stone" ranging from it being a good simplification to a fatal repeat of the 8 bit IPv4 network number + 24 bit host number (before Class B and C was invented). Erik