Let me make an introductory comment on:
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-baker-ipv6-prefix-subdelegation
"Prefix Sub-delegation in a SOHO/SMB Environment", Fred Baker, 27-
Jul-09,
<draft-baker-ipv6-prefix-subdelegation-00.txt>
In IPv6 Operations, we have two posted documents right now that
comment on prefix subdelegation. These are:
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-donley-ipv6-cpe-rtr-use-cases-and-reqs
"Use Cases and Requirements for an IPv6 CPE Router", Chris Donley,
Deepak
Kharbanda, John Jason Brzozowski, Yiu Lee, Jason Weil, Kirk
Erichsen, Lee
Howard, Jean-Francois Tremblay, 2-Jul-09,
<draft-donley-ipv6-cpe-rtr-use-cases-and-reqs-00.txt>
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router
"IPv6 CPE Router Recommendations", Hemant Singh, Wes Beebee, 25-
Mar-09,
<draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-00.txt>
The premise is that an ISP might delegate a PA prefix to a SOHO/SMB
network, perhaps using DHCP or etc. It would be nice if the prefix
could be in turn sliced into /64 prefixes and sub-delegated to the
various LANs in the subsidiary network.
draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router is trying to recommend to vendors
that they should build CPE routers in a certain way, and specifies in
part how sub-delegation would work. In my opinion as WG chair, I would
rather that it said "do RFC X" than "do the following algorithm", as
one might want to change the algorithm and the proposed algorithm has
not been proven operationally. In general, I would like 6man to take
on the work of describing that algorithm.
I threw draft-baker-ipv6-prefix-subdelegation together very quickly
for the purpose of saying "I would want you to reference something
like <this>". That said, it is at least a first step, and may be the
right answer for the moment. I would appreciate it if 6man could take
a look at the discussion on sub-delegation in the two CPE drafts and
at this draft, and decide first whether the draft is a reasonable
first step toward solving the problem that the CPE drafts target, and
then further decide whether and with what authors they would like to
finish that discussion. I'm throwing no personal ego in here - if
someone else would like to respond to the question, less work on my
part sounds good to me.
Your opinions, please...
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
[email protected]
Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------
