Standardized IPv6 ULA from PublicKey
arti.zirk at gmail.com
Mon Jun 29 19:01:51 CEST 2020
On E, 2020-06-29 at 14:15 +0200, Toke Høiland-Jørgensen wrote:
> In general I'd say that deviating from the RFC needs a good reason.
> Expanding the number of bits we can use for the identifier may be a
> good reason to expand the LL interface ID width (although I'm not
> actually too worried about collisions even if we only use 64 bits).
Few more counter arguments against expanding identifier length:
1. There is a rejected errata 4406 that wants to do this
2. FreeBSD and probably other *BSD/macOS use those unused 56 bits to
store the link scope_id. And support nonstandard fe80:1::30/64 notation
instead of fe80::30%1/64 to specify the scope.
More information about the WireGuard