[IPv6]Re: Working Group Last Call for <draft-ietf-6man-pio-pflag>

[Jen Linkova <[e-mail]>]

On Mon, Jun 3, 2024 at 7:35 PM Eliot Lear <[e-mail]> wrote:
> On 03.06.2024 06:37, Lorenzo Colitti wrote:
>
>> FWIW, if we do want to change the subnet boundary from /64 to /80, one of the ways to do so might be to do that a decade in advance and tie it to one of the other prefixes (say, 3000::/4). After 10 years have passed, hopefully most of the implementations will be ready. But again, it's not clear that we actually need to do this now.
>
> Without taking a position on whether /64->/80 is a good or a bad idea, while I like the idea of taking time to make a change of this nature, I would not be a fan of tying yet more semantics to IP addresses.  For one thing, what do you do if an implementation doesn't make the change in that time table and still lands in this new block?

I'd say it would be similar to a scenario when a device which doesn't
support SLAAC at all lands on a SLAAC-only network. Or a device which
can not process certain flags or certain RA options and ignore the
whole RA (all cases are examples from real life) - so such devices
would violate a MUST, would not work and need to be fixed.

-- 
Cheers, Jen Linkova