Subject: RE: dialup PPP (material for interim meeting)

From: "Hesham Soliman (ERA)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2001 00:52:39 +0200

> >going back to the original question, based on your 
> >implementation experience, would hosts use 3041
> >on a PPP link ? 
> 
> 	please declare which addressing policy is in your mind, otherwise
> 	we cannot even diagnose...
> 
	=> Stateless address autoconfigration. If the interface id 
	as assigned to the host during PPP negotation, would 
	you still use RFC 3041 later ? 
	Note, I'm not referring to a /64 assignment or multi-link 
	subnets, just a simple /128 one. 

	Hesham
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List
IPng Home Page:                      http://playground.sun.com/ipng
FTP archive:                      ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng
Direct all administrative requests to [email-masked]
--------------------------------------------------------------------

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2001 08:15:36 +0900

>	subnets, just a simple /128 one. 

	multilink subnet issue should be diagnosed only after we diagnose
	situation without it, so let us take multilink subnet case aside...

	if you see /64 RA on dialup link, the link has the /64 prefix.  so
	you can use RFC3041 after IPv6CP negotiation (don't forget to run DAD!).
	if you really really would like to hide your EUI64 from anyone, use
	random-number-generated EUI64 on IPv6CP too (to hide your IPv6CP
	from the adjacent ISP router).

itojun

---

From: Ole Troan <[email-masked]>
Date: 05 Jun 2001 20:47:19 +0100

Hesham,

> 	subnets, just a simple /128 one. 

current stateless address autoconfiguration does not allow assignment
of a /128. i.e prefixes where the prefix length in the RA is 128.

/ot