Subject: RFC 3484 update?

From: "timothy enos" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2005 02:26:59 -0400

On 23Jun05, on this list there began and ended a thread concerning ULAs,
multicast, and RFC 3484. I agree with the contention espoused by some
that RFC 3484 should be updated. Section 3.1 clearly states that with
the presence of a multicast destination address, a comparison between
the multicast address scope and that of the unicast is required. Not
only is there comparison, but also mapping. This 1:1 correspondence is
problematic for site-local (and presumably organization-local) multicast
addresses given RFC 3879 which formally deprecated unicast site-local
addresses (FEC0::/10). To what type of unicast source address will the
algorithm map site-local (0x5) and organization-local (0x8) now that
unicast site-locals are deprecated? The last sentence in RFC 3484, page
7, section 3.1 says: "This mapping implicitly conflates unicast site
boundaries and multicast site boundaries." This part of the source
address selection algorithm is fundamentally broken (for 'new'
implementations) given RFC 3879. Similarly broken would be the part of
the destination address selection algorithm that assigns a site-local
scope to the RFC 1918 addresses.

Another reason for the update of RFC 3484 would seem to be that RFC
2373, 2462, 3041 (all normative references for 3484) are in the process
of being updated themselves (with the very first one listed, "IP Version
6 Addressing Architecture" being in its second revision since RFC 3484
was published (the first of course being RFC 3513)).

Will RFC 3484 be updated? If 'yes', when? If not, why not?

Best regards,

Tim Enos
1Sam16:7

--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
[email-masked]
Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------