Subject: RE: why 0xFFFE is used in the modified EUI-64 format

From: "Durand, Alain" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 21:34:27 -0500

>>>     that uses IEEE EUI-48 and MAC-48 identifiers on the same link, 
>>> the
>>>     0xFF and 0xFF values could be used to convert the EUI-48 
>>> identifiers
>>>     for use as IPv6 interface identifiers to avoid any potential for
>>>     duplicate interface identifiers.
>>
>> I said 'personally' because it may be controversial to mention the
>> possibility of the future use of 0xFFFF at this stage (i.e., it may be
>> beyond the level of 'clarification').  But if the IESG accepts the
>> description (or the RFC editor agrees this is minor enough), I'm happy
>> with that.
>
> It's only a note at the end of an appendix, but I wouldn't object to 
> removing the last sentence if others are troubled by it.  The intent 
> was to provide some advice to someone writing an IPv6 over <foo> 
> specification.

I concur that the last sentence should be removed. It doesn't help to clarify the current situation
and may be read as closing the door to other future use of 0xFF and 0xFF.
 
  -  Alain.

--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
[email-masked]
Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------

---

From: Bob Hinden <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 09:53:47 -0800

Hi,

> and may be read as closing the door to other future use of 0xFF and  

OK, I will remove the last sentence and send the text off to the RFC- 
Editor.

Thanks,
Bob