No Gyan, fc00::/7 is not available for carving. fc00::/8 is on reserve for
the dreamt-of centrally registered ULA prefixes, and fd00::/8 is fully
committed.
If SRV6 is important, it could justify its own prefix.
Regards,
Brian Carpenter
(via tiny screen & keyboard)
On Thu, 29 Sep 2022, 19:45 Gyan Mishra, <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 28, 2022 at 11:31 PM Brian E Carpenter <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
>> On 29-Sep-22 16:06, Gyan Mishra wrote:
>> ...
>>
>> > We should qualify the IANA request to make the /16 non internet
>> routable identical to ULA addressing.
>> >
>> > If that is what we desire then why don’t we make it standard BCP to
>> always use ULA for the operators SRV6 domain.
>>
>> I don't believe that a /48 would be enough, but it is required, to
>> conform with RFC4193.
>
>
> Gyan> Understood. Most operators would like to use ULA for SRV6
> deployments so do we need to carve out block out of ULA space just as we
> are doing for GUA to conform with RFC 4291. ULA has is a big enough block
> FC00::/7 so we could carve a block out of that. Does not need to be as
> large a block allocation for SIDs as it would not be advertised to the
> internet does not require to be globally unique.
>
>>
>>
>> Brian
>>
>> > We would not have to burn up a /16 unnecessarily.
>> >
>> >
>> > Kind Regards
>> >
>> > Gyan
>> >
>> > On Sat, Sep 17, 2022 at 4:00 AM Jen Linkova <[email protected] <mailto:
>> [email protected]>> wrote:
>> >
>> > Hello,
>> >
>> > This email starts the 6man Working Group Last Call for the "Segment
>> > Identifiers in SRv6" draft
>> > (https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-6man-sids <
>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-6man-sids>).
>> >
>> > The WGLC ends on Tue, Oct 4, 23:59:59 UTC.
>> >
>> > As the document is closely related to the work in the SPRING WG,
>> we'd
>> > like the SPRING WG to review the document and discuss the following
>> > questions:
>> >
>> > - the action items required from SPRING (Section 4.1 and 4.2 of the
>> > draft,
>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-6man-sids-01#section-4 <
>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-6man-sids-01#section-4>)
>> > [*]. Would it make sense to merge those open issues with the 'Open
>> > Issues' section of
>> > the SPRING document?
>> > - whether the document needs more guidance regarding routability of
>> > /16 or such requirements shall belong to some other document? In
>> > particular, shall we specify that it MUST NOT be in the DFZ? Or
>> > setting 'Globally Reachable = false' in the registry should be
>> > sufficient? The current idea is that the prefix needs to fail closed
>> > and not be routable by default.
>> >
>> > [*] The draft currently refers to the individual submission instead
>> of
>> >
>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-spring-srv6-srh-compression/
>> <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-spring-srv6-srh-compression/
>> >
>> > - the link will be updated in the next revision.
>> >
>> > Please review the draft and send your comments to the list/
>> >
>> > --
>> > SY, Jen Linkova aka Furry
>> >
>> > --------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
>> > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>> > Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
>> <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6>
>> > --------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >
>> > --
>> >
>> > <http://www.verizon.com/>
>> >
>> > *Gyan Mishra*
>> >
>> > /Network Solutions A//rchitect /
>> >
>> > /Email [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>//
>> > /
>> >
>> > /M 301 502-1347
>> >
>> > /
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
>> > [email protected]
>> > Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
>> > --------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
> --
>
> <http://www.verizon.com/>
>
> *Gyan Mishra*
>
> *Network Solutions A**rchitect *
>
> *Email [email protected] <[email protected]>*
>
>
>
> *M 301 502-1347*
>
>
_______________________________________________
spring mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring
