Subject: RFC 8425 on IANA Considerations for IPv6 Neighbor Discovery Prefix Information Option Flags

From: [email-masked]
Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2018 16:23:12 -0700 (PDT)

A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries.

        RFC 8425

        Title:      IANA Considerations for IPv6 Neighbor Discovery 
                    Prefix Information Option Flags 
        Author:     O. Troan
        Status:     Standards Track
        Stream:     IETF
        Date:       July 2018
        Mailbox:    [email-masked]
        Pages:      4
        Characters: 6692
        Updates:    RFC 4861

        I-D Tag:    draft-ietf-6man-ndpioiana-04.txt

        URL:        https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8425

        DOI:        10.17487/RFC8425

The Prefix Information Option (PIO) in the IPv6 Neighbor Discovery
Router Advertisement message defines an 8-bit flag field; this field
has two flags defined, and the remaining 6 bits are reserved
(Reserved1).  RFC 6275 defines a flag from this field without
creating an IANA registry or updating RFC 4861.  The purpose of this
document is to create an IANA registry for the PIO flags.  This
document updates RFC 4861.

This document is a product of the IPv6 Maintenance Working Group of the IETF.

This is now a Proposed Standard.

STANDARDS TRACK: This document specifies an Internet Standards Track
protocol for the Internet community, and requests discussion and suggestions
for improvements.  Please refer to the current edition of the Official
Internet Protocol Standards (https://www.rfc-editor.org/standards) for the 
standardization state and status of this protocol.  Distribution of this 
memo is unlimited.

This announcement is sent to the IETF-Announce and rfc-dist lists.
To subscribe or unsubscribe, see
  https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce
  https://mailman.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-dist

For searching the RFC series, see https://www.rfc-editor.org/search
For downloading RFCs, see https://www.rfc-editor.org/retrieve/bulk

Requests for special distribution should be addressed to either the
author of the RFC in question, or to [email-masked].  Unless
specifically noted otherwise on the RFC itself, all RFCs are for
unlimited distribution.

The RFC Editor Team
Association Management Solutions, LLC