Margaret / Shin / Ralph,
> Margaret Wasserman
> This is an IPv6 working group last call for comments on
> submitting the following document for consideration as an
> Informational RFC:
> Title: Requirements for IPv6 prefix delegation
> 4.1 Number and Length of Delegated Prefixed
> The prefix delegation mechanism SHOULD allow for delegation
> of prefixes of length /48, /64 and other lengths, and SHOULD
> allow for delegation of more than one prefix to the customer.
This is too vague IMHO; either:
a) s\and other lengths\and other lengths shorter than /64
or
b) s\and other lengths\and other lengths between /48 and /64
b) is more restrictive, although it could be argued that the very few
organizations that will be assigned a prefix shorter than /48 will
likely not use prefix delegation and break it up in multiple /48s
anyway.
- IMHO, there should be a non-normative reference to RFC3177 in
1.Introduction, as it would clarify the expectation that customers will
be assigned a /48 IPv6 address prefix.
- If convenient, a normative reference to the
soon-to-be-published-any-day-now addr-arch-3.11 would be useful to
complete the paper trail.
- 4.7 Layer 2 Considerations. "Layer 2" could be confusing as there is
no reference to the model. The model I guess you have in mind is fine by
me as I have long lobbied for using a well-defined de-jure model instead
of a blurry de-facto model for documentation purposes, but I hear that
it is a capital sin to use this model within the IETF.
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]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
