"Liguangpeng (Roc, Network Technology Laboratory)" wrote:
>> -----Original Message----- From: Pascal Thubert (pthubert)
>> <pthubert=40cisco....@dmarc.ietf.org> Sent: Monday, August 22, 2022
>> 2:18 PM To: Liguangpeng (Roc, Network Technology Laboratory)
>> <liguangp...@huawei.com> Cc: Michael Richardson
>> <mcr+i...@sandelman.ca>; 6lo <6lo@ietf.org> Subject: Re: [6lo] Call
>> for WG adoption of draft-li-6lo-native-short-address-03
>>
>> Hello Guangpeng
>>
>> If we take the DC sensors as use case and racks are organized in
>> trees, and you add a new rack then there will be renumbering.
> No, it doesn't. Just attach this new rack to existing racks and don't
> move existing racks to this new rack meanwhile. The latter action is
> weird and superfluous.
no, what you suggest is weird.
More cables and more tangles.
(I still operate systems in cabinets in data centres)
>> Do it at L3 and you’re screwed.
>>
> BTW, I think derive IPv6 from L2 is not a reliable assumption
> considering privacy issues and fake MAC problems. This is why we need
> develop a short L3 address in 6lo.
Given a wired situation of sensors in a data center, I have no privacy concerns.
If we are talking about 100baseT1, then I also have no concern with packet size.
--
Michael Richardson <mcr+i...@sandelman.ca> . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting )
Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ 6lo mailing list 6lo@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lo
