On Wed, 2009-05-06 at 14:24 +0100, Tony Finch wrote: > On Wed, 6 May 2009, Karl Auer wrote: > > On Tue, 2009-05-05 at 15:58 -0400, Ricky Beam wrote: > > > "stateless" with "constant" and "consistent". SLAAC doesn't need to > > > generate the exact same address everytime the system is started. > > > > No - but it is *phenomenally useful* if it does. Changing addresses is > > only ever something you want in very specific circumstances. > > You'll love RFC 4941 as implemented by Windows Vista and later.
The fact that MS chose to use that as the default with Vista is odd, and I think a bad choice, but RFC4941 is not a bad thing in itself. It is an alternative that makes good sense in some contexts - but not, I think, in most contexts. And it's easy enough to turn off. XP uses temporary addresses too, also easy to turn off. Regards, K. -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Karl Auer (ka...@biplane.com.au) +61-2-64957160 (h) http://www.biplane.com.au/~kauer/ +61-428-957160 (mob) GPG fingerprint: 07F3 1DF9 9D45 8BCD 7DD5 00CE 4A44 6A03 F43A 7DEF
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
