Re: Multilink PPP for IPv6
James Carlson <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.pppext |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Anupama Potluri writes: > I am not sure if this has already been discussed. If so, I am sorry. I > am wondering if there are any changes for multilink PPP RFC wrt IPv6 - > specifically, in the endpoint discriminator field, I see that one of the > classes can be an IPv4 address. So, I am wondering if this is going to > be expanded to include an IPv6 address? Any other changes? Any proposals > already out there? Any help or pointers to any previous discussion will > be highly appreciated. No, it hasn't been discussed, as best I can tell. I don't think it's quite a necessary thing to do, though it might be nice. A device that speaks IP but has only IPv6 addresses (and *no* IPv4 address at all) could use the 'deprecated' Class 1 (Locally Assigned Address) address space and place the address there. If a new IPv6 class were added to avoid the possibility of identifier duplication, it'd need to specify (at least) that only global unicast addresses (RFC 3513) could be used. (The IPv4-compatible addresses have the right uniqueness, but if you have a globally-unique IPv4 address that you could use to form such an IPv6 address, then you'd already be able to use RFC 1990 Class 2 and you wouldn't need this new feature.) I'd suggest that if someone wants to update RFC 1990, it'd be helpful to advance it to Standard status as well. -- James Carlson, IP Systems Group <[email protected]> Sun Microsystems / 1 Network Drive 71.234W Vox +1 781 442 2084 MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.497N Fax +1 781 442 1677 _______________________________________________ Pppext mailing list [email protected] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pppext