[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: not-routable prefix for CBIDs



Francis Dupont wrote:
As it seems we won't have enough time I explain here my idea about
a not-routable prefix for CBIDs:
 - there are some uses of cryptographically generated identifiers
   (the details are not important, they can considered as identifiers
    with random bits)
 - these identifiers follow the IPv6 address format, mainly in order
   to be handled by common APIs
 - these identifiers are not addresses so should be very easy to be
   recognized as they are, for instance they are not-routable
 - IMHO the best is to give them a dedicated prefix in the IPv6
   address space
 - the only real constraint is the length of the prefix: IANA advice
   is 16 bit length
 - so my question is how to procedd, possible concerns, etc.

What would you use them for?

They might be interesting as an unreachable ULID in the multi6 context, but do you see a use other than that?

   Erik

--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
ipv6@xxxxxxxx
Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------