Re: A Question about L2 ID .....

>The CARD protocol should be able to operate on any kind of (wireless) L2
>technologies including their various MAC/link address formats.
>So the CARD protocol does not assume any single format for MAC/link
>addresses.
>Hope this answers your question.

First of all, thank you for your help.
I've got this point and I agree: the use of a L2 (wireless) MAC for a 
plurality of technologies needs.

I just think that it's a waste of work defining a syntax when a 
standard, to this purpose, already exists: the (Modified) EUI-64 is 
used, for example, to derive a *number* of kind of MACs into IPv6 
addresses (see Appendix A in RFC3513).

If the CARD protocol aims to define a global MAC, EUI-64 is an easy 
solution (IMHO).

Simone

>
>Eunsoo
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Simone Molendini" <[email protected]>
>To: "James Kempf" <[email protected]>
>Cc: <[email protected]>
>Sent: Friday, October 03, 2003 9:28 AM
>Subject: Re: [Seamoby] A Question about L2 ID .....
>
>
>>  I have concerns on the fact that par. 5.1.3.1 defines the "L2 type"
>>  and "L2 ID" fields as a L2 general ID (with unassigned values and
>>  prefixes).
>>
>>  The fixed-length EUI-64 is used as a global identifier in a number of
>>  the format prefixes Interface IDs (including IEEE802).
>>
>>  Why using what haven't been already defined when something else has
>>  been defined and registered?
>>
>>  Simone
>>
>>  >It's the MAC address.
>>  >
>  > >         jak