[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

FW: draft-ietf-v6ops-addcon WGLC



Sorry, typing too fast ...

Obviously it was "I think the text is correct if you read it considering the
reference to RFC3177."

Regards,
Jordi



------ Mensaje reenviado
De: JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <jordi.palet@consulintel.es>
Responder a: <jordi.palet@consulintel.es>
Fecha: Wed, 06 Dec 2006 12:29:58 -0200
Para: <v6ops@ops.ietf.org>
Conversación: draft-ietf-v6ops-addcon WGLC
Asunto: Re: draft-ietf-v6ops-addcon WGLC

I thin the text is correct if you read it considering the reverence to
RFC3177.

However, an alternative wording may be something such as:

... By default a site will receive a /48 prefix [8], however different RIR
service regions policies may suggest alternative default assignments or let
the ISPs to decide on what they believe is more appropriate for their
specific case.

Also, for section 3.3.4 I want to suggest some rewarding, as it seems to
somehow "priorize" /126 for point-to-point links. I will use:

   The 126 bit subnet prefixes are typically used for point-to-point
   links similar to the RFC3021 [5] recommendations for IPv4.  The usage
   of this subnet address length does not lead to any additional
   considerations other than the ones discussed earlier in this section,
   particularly those related to the "u" and "g" bits. The 126 bit subnet
prefixes aren't the only alternatives for this, as frequently other sizes
such as 64, 112, etc., are also used (reference to
draft-palet-v6ops-point2point-01, which is being updated soon also).

Last, but not least, I will much prefer that migration is not used in the
document (5.2.3.4), and instead transition or transition/co-existence is
used.

Regards,
Jordi




> De: Ginny Listman <ginny@arin.net>
> Responder a: <owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org>
> Fecha: Wed, 6 Dec 2006 09:03:07 -0500
> Para: Fred Baker <fred@cisco.com>
> CC: <v6ops@ops.ietf.org>, <david.kessens@nokia.com>, <kurtis@kurtis.pp.se>
> Asunto: Re: draft-ietf-v6ops-addcon WGLC
> 
> On Sun, Dec 03, 2006 at 01:15:01PM -0800, Fred Baker wrote:
>> This is to announce a working group last call of http://
>> tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-v6ops-addcon
>> 
>> Please read the draft at this time, noting spelling or wording issues
>> to the authors and substantive issues to the authors copying the list.
>> 
>> Working Group last call will close in two weeks.
>> 
> 
> I had the Registration Services folks here at ARIN review the document,
> as they are more aware of the address assignment considerations that I
> am. The only comment is as follows:
> 
> 
> IPv6 Unicast Address Assignment Considerations writes:
> 
> 2.4.1.  Sizing the Network Allocation
> 
>    We do not discuss here how a network designer sizes their application
>    for address space.  By default a site will receive a /48 prefix [8].
>    The default provider allocation via the RIRs is currently a /32 [28].
>    These allocations are indicators for a first allocation for a
>    network.  Different sizes may be obtained based on the anticipated
>    address usage [28].  There are examples of allocations as large as
>    /19 having been made from RIRs to providers at the time of writing.
> 
> 
> The second sentence isn't really true in the ARIN policy set. Our policy
> recommends:
> 
> "/56 for small sites, those expected to need only a few subnets over the
> next 5 years."
> 
> cf. http://www.arin.net/policy/nrpm.html#six54
> 
> The second sentence should be either struck or amended to reflect /56 for
> the ARIN region.
> 
> 




**********************************************
The IPv6 Portal: http://www.ipv6tf.org

Bye 6Bone. Hi, IPv6 !
http://www.ipv6day.org

This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or
confidential. The information is intended to be for the use of the
individual(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient be aware
that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this
information, including attached files, is prohibited.






**********************************************
The IPv6 Portal: http://www.ipv6tf.org

Bye 6Bone. Hi, IPv6 !
http://www.ipv6day.org

This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or
confidential. The information is intended to be for the use of the
individual(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient be aware
that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this
information, including attached files, is prohibited.



------ Fin del mensaje reenviado




**********************************************
The IPv6 Portal: http://www.ipv6tf.org

Bye 6Bone. Hi, IPv6 !
http://www.ipv6day.org

This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the use of the individual(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, including attached files, is prohibited.