Subject: [v6ops] I-D Action:draft-ietf-v6ops-3177bis-end-sites-00.txt

From: [email-masked]
Date: Sat, 25 Sep 2010 23:15:07 -0700 (PDT)

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
This draft is a work item of the IPv6 Operations Working Group of the IETF.

	Title           : IPv6 Address Assignment to End Sites
	Author(s)       : T. Narten, et al.
	Filename        : draft-ietf-v6ops-3177bis-end-sites-00.txt
	Pages           : 10
	Date            : 2010-09-25

RFC 3177 argued that in IPv6, end sites should be assigned /48 blocks
in most cases. The Regional Internet Registries (RIRs) adopted that
recommendation in 2002, but began reconsidering the policy in 2005.
This document revisits and updates the RFC 3177 recommendations on
the assignment of IPv6 address space to end sites.  The exact choice
of how much address space to assign end sites is an issue for the
operational community. The role of the IETF is limited to providing
guidance on IPv6 architectural and operational considerations. This
document reviews the architectural and operational considerations of
end site assignments as well as the motivations behind the original
3177 recommendations. Moreover, the document clarifies that a one-
size-fits-all recommendation of /48 is not nuanced enough for the
broad range of end sites and is no longer recommended as a single
default.

This document updates and replaces RFC 3177.

A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-v6ops-3177bis-end-sites-00.txt

Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/

Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader
implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the
Internet-Draft.

---

From: Brian E Carpenter <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2010 11:28:28 +1300

I'm all for this document and as far as I'm concerned the content
is ready to ship.

There is one rather silly concern that probably needs to be fixed.

> Updates: 3177 
...
> This document updates and replaces RFC 3177.

3177 was jointly issued by the IESG and the IAB. So I think it's
necessary to be able to state that the IAB agrees with this draft,
as well as getting IESG approval in the normal way.

Also, "updates and replaces" seems mighty like "obsoletes" to me.

   Brian

On 2010-09-26 19:15, [email-masked] wrote:
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> _______________________________________________
> v6ops mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops

---

From: Fred Baker <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 26 Sep 2010 16:26:29 -0700

> I'm all for this document and as far as I'm concerned the content

Thanks. I'll be opening a WGLC on it in late October - we have a couple others between then and now, and I try to do only one at a time to keep the list discussion focused. May I consider this your WGLC comment?