RE: [RRG] Re: Does every host need a FQDN name in the future?//re:[RRG] draft-rja-ilnp-intro-01.txt

[Steven Blake <slblake@petri-meat.com>]

On Thu, 2008-08-07 at 16:58 +0800, Sheng Jiang wrote:

> I am with Ilji. A well-organized hierarchical system can easily guarantee global
> uniqueness. Every level can control it only assigns unique prefix to next level
> within its only prefix pool. Both FQHN and IP address are good examples, which have
> achieve global uniqueness. It is only difficult if we want to achieve global
> uniqueness with pure flat structure, like current HIT. Now, the point is whether
> statistical uniqueness is enough. If the answer is no, change the structure.

IPv6 addresses are only guaranteed to be unique because if two host
interfaces on the same link happen to share the same IID, then Neighbor
Discovery breaks and the first-hop router cannot resolve who to send
packets to.

The exact same property holds for any 8+8 scheme.

As long as hosts are allowed to autoconfigure the lower 8 bytes of their
address field, then it is not possible to guarantee global uniqueness
for that part of the address.  The best that can be accomplished is to
ensure that nothing breaks if two hosts in the Internet happen to share
the same value for those 8 bytes.


Regards,

// Steve


--
to unsubscribe send a message to rrg-request@psg.com with the
word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://psg.com/lists/rrg/> & ftp://psg.com/pub/lists/rrg