[Casm] Fwd: Last Call: <draft-ietf-v6ops-unique-ipv6-prefix-per-host-03.txt> (Unique IPv6 Prefix Per Host) to Best Current Practice

"Marc Blanchet" <marc.blanchet@viagenie.ca> Tue, 23 May 2017 19:51 UTC

Return-Path: <marc.blanchet@viagenie.ca>
X-Original-To: casm@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: casm@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B6D2A12EAE1 for <casm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 23 May 2017 12:51:56 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.902
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.902 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id QT3-SdWRcBIo for <casm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 23 May 2017 12:51:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from jazz.viagenie.ca (jazz.viagenie.ca [IPv6:2620:0:230:8000::2]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7644912EAEB for <CASM@ietf.org>; Tue, 23 May 2017 12:51:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [] (h132.viagenie.ca []) by jazz.viagenie.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E489347679 for <CASM@ietf.org>; Tue, 23 May 2017 15:51:53 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Marc Blanchet" <marc.blanchet@viagenie.ca>
To: "CASM@ietf.org" <CASM@ietf.org>
Date: Tue, 23 May 2017 15:51:53 -0400
Message-ID: <BD0DFE75-6D45-4C62-A708-3F4123D9BF9D@viagenie.ca>
References: <149556850339.28443.2716896366216678645.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; markup=markdown
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Mailer: MailMate (1.9.6r5347)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/casm/6fbwy8d2qAmTP3mRD947Je8DrKA>
Subject: [Casm] Fwd: Last Call: <draft-ietf-v6ops-unique-ipv6-prefix-per-host-03.txt> (Unique IPv6 Prefix Per Host) to Best Current Practice
X-BeenThere: casm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: Coordinated Address Space Management <casm.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/casm>, <mailto:casm-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/casm/>
List-Post: <mailto:casm@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:casm-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/casm>, <mailto:casm-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 23 May 2017 19:51:57 -0000

  this could really benefit from CASM architecture, IMHO.


Forwarded message:

> From: The IESG <iesg-secretary@ietf.org>
> To: IETF-Announce <ietf-announce@ietf.org>
> Cc: v6ops@ietf.org, rbonica@juniper.net, 
> draft-ietf-v6ops-unique-ipv6-prefix-per-host@ietf.org, 
> draft-ietf-v6ops-unique-ipv6-prefix-per-host.all@ietf.org, 
> v6ops-chairs@ietf.org
> Subject: Last Call: 
> <draft-ietf-v6ops-unique-ipv6-prefix-per-host-03.txt> (Unique IPv6 
> Prefix Per Host) to Best Current Practice
> Date: Tue, 23 May 2017 12:41:43 -0700
> The IESG has received a request from the IPv6 Operations WG (v6ops) to
> consider the following document:
> - 'Unique IPv6 Prefix Per Host'
>   <draft-ietf-v6ops-unique-ipv6-prefix-per-host-03.txt> as Best 
> Current
> Practice
> The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits
> final comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the
> ietf@ietf.org mailing lists by 2017-06-06. Exceptionally, comments may 
> be
> sent to iesg@ietf.org instead. In either case, please retain the
> beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting.
> Abstract
>    In some IPv6 environments, the need has arisen for hosts to be able
>    to utilize a unique IPv6 prefix, even though the link or media may 
> be
>    shared.  Typically hosts (subscribers) on a shared network, either
>    wired or wireless, such as Ethernet, WiFi, etc., will acquire 
> unique
>    IPv6 addresses from a common IPv6 prefix that is allocated or
>    assigned for use on a specific link.
>    In most deployments today, IPv6 address assignment from a single 
> IPv6
>    prefix on a shared network is done by either using IPv6 stateless
>    address auto-configuration (SLAAC) and/or stateful DHCPv6.  While
>    this is still viable and operates as designed, there are some large
>    scale environments where this concept introduces significant
>    performance challenges and implications, specifically related to 
> IPv6
>    router and neighbor discovery.
>    This document outlines an approach utilising existing IPv6 
> protocols
>    to allow hosts to be assigned a unique IPv6 prefix (instead of a
>    unique IPv6 address from a shared IPv6 prefix).  Benefits of unique
>    IPv6 prefix over a unique IPv6 address from the service provider
>    include improved subscriber isolation and enhanced subscriber
>    management.
> The file can be obtained via
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-v6ops-unique-ipv6-prefix-per-host/
> IESG discussion can be tracked via
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-v6ops-unique-ipv6-prefix-per-host/ballot/
> No IPR declarations have been submitted directly on this I-D.
> The document contains these normative downward references.
> See RFC 3967 for additional information:
>     rfc6106: IPv6 Router Advertisement Options for DNS Configuration 
> (Proposed Standard - IETF stream)
>     rfc4941: Privacy Extensions for Stateless Address 
> Autoconfiguration in IPv6 (Draft Standard - IETF stream)
>     rfc4862: IPv6 Stateless Address Autoconfiguration (Draft Standard 
> - IETF stream)
>     rfc3315: Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for IPv6 (DHCPv6) 
> (Proposed Standard - IETF stream)