ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

RE: IPv6 addresses really are scarce after all

2007-08-26 04:03:46
I find the fact that RFC 3177 has not been revised to reflect the 
reality of today is a bit disapointing.

"reality of today" seems like an odd concept when trying to 
make or revisit design decisions that will need to serve us 
for decades.  I keep seeing people making the same mistake of 
trying to design the future Internet to meet only the needs 
of the current Internet.

Just to clarify, RFC 3177 discusses characteristics of IPv6 such as NLAs
and TLAs that have been deprecated. When a reader realizes that some of
the topic matter of this RFC is obsolete/deprecated, they are no longer
able to trust anything in the document.

Thomas is saying that RFC 3177 needs to be updated because of the
deprecated bits. And if this document is to be revisited then it could
include other material to become "IPv6 Addressing Guidelines for RIRs
and ISPs".

Frankly I think that statement is out of order.  The RIRs 
need to be taking it to IETF.

They would if it was clear that their activities were contrary to a
published RFC. The IETF must take the first step here and clarify
things.

Now I'm all for prudent use of IPv6 space, and if the /48 
needs to be changed to /56 or some other value, then by all 
means let's have the discussion here.  But the discussion 
belongs here, not elsewhere.  IPv6 is a lot of delicately 
crafted compromises, and it's not as if these
compromises were made independently of one another.   Changes 
like this
can have unintended consequences, and these need to be 
understood and examined.  RIRs are not in a position to do this.

Agreed. But the working relationship between the RIRs and the IETF is
somewhat in tatters at present. An update of RFC 3177 would be a fine
first step to repair that relationship.

--Michael Dillon

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>