ipv6 addressing - non-routable equivalents?

[David Gethings]

> 
> I presume the "8 bits" is part of a brain fog as 64-48 is 16, not 8.
> 
> My reading of rfc2373 (which can be retrieved from
> ftp://ftp.isi.edu/in-notes/rfc2373.txt, if you have a mind to read it) is
> that those 16 bits (which are inserted starting at bit 24) are required to
> be 0xfffe.
> 
> I don't want to speak ill of the standards process as it's tough enough to
> accomplish as it is, but didn't anybody consider the fact that people are
> going to want to use address-based virtual hosting when designing this
> scheme, or am I missing something?
> -- 
Hi John,

You're quite right, appendix A of rfc2372 does specify that the "spare" 16
bits should be set to 0xffe.

Next time I comment on a public list like this I'll make sure it isn't
4am and I not trying to also console a crying baby in my arms!

Dave