RE: Updates to RFC6434

"Templin, Fred L" <> Mon, 30 October 2017 19:37 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 389F113F954 for <>; Mon, 30 Oct 2017 12:37:17 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.219
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.219 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id VZ-6Ek3s9Hzt for <>; Mon, 30 Oct 2017 12:37:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CBBFF13F639 for <>; Mon, 30 Oct 2017 12:37:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (8.14.4/8.14.4/DOWNSTREAM_MBSOUT) with SMTP id v9UJbDGS017646; Mon, 30 Oct 2017 12:37:14 -0700
Received: from ( []) by (8.14.4/8.14.4/UPSTREAM_MBSOUT) with ESMTP id v9UJbCDA017635 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Mon, 30 Oct 2017 12:37:12 -0700
Received: from (2002:8988:eede::8988:eede) by (2002:8988:eed5::8988:eed5) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1320.4; Mon, 30 Oct 2017 12:37:11 -0700
Received: from ([]) by ([]) with mapi id 15.00.1320.000; Mon, 30 Oct 2017 12:37:11 -0700
From: "Templin, Fred L" <>
To: Timothy Winters <>, 6man WG <>
Subject: RE: Updates to RFC6434
Thread-Topic: Updates to RFC6434
Thread-Index: AQHTUYUM7Yt7hhS0AUynTqYnnBzBvqL8yXlw
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2017 19:37:11 +0000
Message-ID: <>
References: <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: []
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_647efa67a24f4511ab1968ec6c9227acXCH150608nwnosboeingcom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-TM-AS-MML: disable
Archived-At: <>
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: "IPv6 Maintenance Working Group \(6man\)" <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2017 19:37:17 -0000

We talked about adding an informative reference to RFC1122. Can
you please add that?


From: ipv6 [] On Behalf Of Timothy Winters
Sent: Monday, October 30, 2017 6:43 AM
To: 6man WG <>
Subject: Updates to RFC6434

We have posted an updated version of 6434bis, with the following changes since Prague:

  *   Text on EH processing
  *   Noted that RFC4191 is a MUST, but a SHOULD for Type C node
  *   Updated RFC references (8200, 8201, 8221, 8247)
  *   Added note on RFC 7772 for power consumption
  *   Added ‘Why /64?’ reference; RFC 7421
  *   Removed jumbogram text
  *   Added reference to draft-ietf-v6ops-unique-ipv6-prefix-per-host
  *   For 3GPP, added ‘snapshot’ comment on RFC7066
  *   Added RFC8028 as a SHOULD (for Section 5.5 from RFC 6724)
  *   Removed ATM over IPv6
  *   Added reference to RFC8064
  *   Added MUST for BCP 198, and ref to draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6rtr-reqs
  *   Added text on avoiding 1280 MTU for UDP (inc. DNS) traffic
We'll be sending some additional questions to the list later this week to hopefully get this document ready for working group last call.

~Tim, Tim and John

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: <<>>
Date: Mon, Oct 30, 2017 at 9:36 AM
Subject: I-D Action: draft-ietf-6man-rfc6434-bis-02.txt

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
This draft is a work item of the IPv6 Maintenance WG of the IETF.

        Title           : IPv6 Node Requirements
        Authors         : Tim Chown
                          John Loughney
                          Timothy Winters
        Filename        : draft-ietf-6man-rfc6434-bis-02.txt
        Pages           : 40
        Date            : 2017-10-30

   This document defines requirements for IPv6 nodes.  It is expected
   that IPv6 will be deployed in a wide range of devices and situations.
   Specifying the requirements for IPv6 nodes allows IPv6 to function
   well and interoperate in a large number of situations and

   This document obsoletes RFC 6434, and in turn RFC 4294.

The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:

There are also htmlized versions available at:

A diff from the previous version is available at:

Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission
until the htmlized version and diff are available at<>.

Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:

IETF IPv6 working group mailing list<>
Administrative Requests:


Now offering testing for SDN applications and controllers in our SDN switch test bed. Learn more today