[ipv6hackers] Configuring my laptop to use RFC 7217

Mark ZZZ Smith markzzzsmith at yahoo.com.au
Wed Jul 19 10:15:46 CEST 2017

Indirectly RFC7211 addresses are suggested by rfc3315bis.
"By default, DHCPv6 server implementations SHOULD NOT generate   predictable IPv6 addresses ([RFC7721])."
-> RFC7721,
"Recent releases of   most popular DHCPv6 server software typically lease random addresses   with a similar lease time as that of IPv4.  Thus, these addresses can   be considered to be "stable, semantically opaque".  [DHCPv6-IID]   specifies an algorithm that can be employed by DHCPv6 servers to   generate "stable, semantically opaque" addresses.

              Gont, F. and W. Liu, "A Method for Generating Semantically              Opaque Interface Identifiers with Dynamic Host              Configuration Protocol for IPv6 (DHCPv6)", Work in              Progress, draft-ietf-dhc-stable-privacy-addresses-02,              April 2015.
which I'm pretty sure became RFC7217.

      From: Fernando Gont <fgont at si6networks.com>
 To: IPv6 Hackers Mailing List <ipv6hackers at lists.si6networks.com>; Francis Dupont <Francis.Dupont at fdupont.fr> 
 Sent: Wednesday, 19 July 2017, 5:13
 Subject: Re: [ipv6hackers] Configuring my laptop to use RFC 7217
On 07/17/2017 04:05 PM, Francis Dupont wrote:
> Note that RFC 7217 addresses are not supposed to assign by DHCP.
> After an exchange with Tomek Mrugalski (both DHCP implementor
> and one of IETF DHC WG chair) the conclusion was (quoting Tomek):
> 7217 defines how to do it with SLAAC, not in DHCP. There was a draft
> specific to that (draft-ietf-dhc-stable-privacy-addresses). It was
> adopted in DHC, but after a while it was rejected. Here's the email with
> summary of the issues:
> https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dhcwg/iQKRFN2iRx4zqkyijBub9X-4Byg

Actually, the "issues" were pretty much bogus, and I was quite puzzle
why the document was dropped -- or, more specifically, puzzled about the
rationale with which it was dropped.

This is the email I posted at the time, with no answer from the involved
parties (curiously enough):

Ironically enough, the individual was was louder about dropping this
document is the same one that decided not to support DHCPv6 in Android.

"Funny" world we live in.... :-)

Fernando Gont
SI6 Networks
e-mail: fgont at si6networks.com
PGP Fingerprint: 6666 31C6 D484 63B2 8FB1 E3C4 AE25 0D55 1D4E 7492

Ipv6hackers mailing list
Ipv6hackers at lists.si6networks.com


More information about the Ipv6hackers mailing list