On 02/04/2013 06:56 AM, Rémi Després wrote: > >> I believe that the original question really was "whether it makes >> sense to reserve an unused IID range for 4rd". > > A 4rd reserved range, for 4rd activation to never require IPv6 > renumbering, has been for long in the specification studied in > Softwire.
But my understanding is that softwires didn't adopt 4rd? If 4rd is published as "experimental", then it doesn't make sense to permanently assign an address range to it. >> As noted by Ran Atkinson, since 4rd is an experimental document, >> it seems more appropriate to separate a *shared* range for this >> kind of experiment, rather than assign an IID range to 4rd. > > As already answered to Ran: "Making the reservation for one design, > experimental or not, is a guarantee that no future design with > conflict with it, experimental or not." If you disagree, please > explain. We have several shared resources (ICMPv6 types, etc.) for experiments. Why should this be an exception? Thanks, -- Fernando Gont SI6 Networks e-mail: [email protected] PGP Fingerprint: 6666 31C6 D484 63B2 8FB1 E3C4 AE25 0D55 1D4E 7492 -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list [email protected] Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
