Re: about Wedgelayer 3.5 / Fat IP approaches
Erik Nordmark <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.multi6 |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
> I really don't want to start a discussion here about cryptographic > strength, but my objection to CGAs in the multi6 context is that they > include the /48 prefix in the hash, and that is variable in multi6, > which means that the host ID changes when you change prefix. I think > that's an unfortunate property because it eliminates some possible > tricks in the ID/locator split. Which reminds me about one part I overlooked in thinking about cb64 where the IID is different per prefix: if we do this it isn't any longer possible to have router rewrite the source locator, because a different prefix would imply that the suffix needs to be different. So we need to add that to the list of things to trade off. Erik