On Nov 28, 2011, at 13:25 , Ronald Bonica wrote:
[…] I will submit the draft to the full IESG for its consideration at its
December 1 teleconference. The draft will be published as a BCP if a
sufficient number of IESG members ballot "Yes" or "No Objection", and if no
IESG member ballots "Discuss".
Before I get started, I should offer my deepest and most sincere apologies to
the participants who have heard quite enough about 6to4 to last a lifetime.
Nobody is more ashamed of The 6to4 Problem than me.
I have reservations to this draft because it A) gives explicit advice to
mitigate the addressing conflict it poses for 6to4 sites by recommending
consideration of I-D.kuarsingh-v6ops-6to4-provider-managed-tunnel, which I
would contend is even more controversial than Shared CGN Address Space, and B)
it mischaracterizes the advisory guidelines in RFC 6343 with respect to the
IPv4 Special-Use Addresses in RFC 5375, which in fact are not referenced at
all, and indeed the language in RFC 6343, section 4.2.3 IPv4 Prefix Issues and
section 3 Problems Observed, would seem to contradict the language in this
I could support this draft if instead it were edited to update RFC 3056
directly to clarify the interpretation of its IPv6 Prefix Allocation
requirement in section 2, which currently reads:
Suppose that a subscriber site has at least one valid, globally
unique 32-bit IPv4 address, referred to in this document as V4ADDR.
This address MUST be duly allocated to the site by an address
registry (possibly via a service provider) and it MUST NOT be a
private address [RFC 1918].
I would like to see an explicit recognition that the phrase in RFC 3056, above,
"duly allocated to the site by an address registry (possibly a service
provider)," MUST NOT be interpreted to include the new Shared CGN Address Space
defined by this document.
In simpler terms, what I want is a document that clearly implies 6to4-PMT is
not applicable with this new Shared CGN Address Space. No, I am not joking,
and I'm very sorry that I had to bring up the topic of 6to4 again.
j h woodyatt <jhw(_at_)apple(_dot_)com>
Ietf mailing list