OK for me Brian
Michel Py wrote: > > Bob, > > > Bob Hinden wrote: > > [Erik's text] > > Any one else have comments on this change? > > Works for me. > > [the 2000::/3 prefix issue] > > Re-thinking it, my feelings are now that it would be good to remove it > from the title, and that indeed it is no different than the TLA/NLA > issue; in the same spirit than Erik's text, coining a sentence that says > in substance that FP 001 is dead although 2000::/3 still the only range > allocated for unicast use seems the way to go. In a sense, we could say > that the same way TLAs and NLAs have disappeared to become RIR policy, > FP 001 has disappeared to become IANA matter. > > Proposed title: "IPv6 Global Unicast Address Format" > > Proposed text: > > RFC2374 was the definition of addresses for Format Prefix 001 (2000::/3) > which is formally made historic by this document. Although as specified > in [ARCH] IANA should limit the IPv6 unicast address space to 2000::/3 > for now, IANA might allocate unassigned parts of the IPv6 address space > to Global Unicast later. > > Michel. -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List IPng Home Page: http://playground.sun.com/ipng FTP archive: ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng Direct all administrative requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------
