OFFLIST RE: on the need for documentation addresses of all types

<mohamed.boucadair@orange.com> Mon, 27 February 2017 14:38 UTC

Return-Path: <mohamed.boucadair@orange.com>
X-Original-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1D004129515 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 27 Feb 2017 06:38:37 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.619
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.619 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Bi_-c31xehJf for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 27 Feb 2017 06:38:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: from relais-inet.orange.com (mta241.mail.business.static.orange.com [80.12.66.41]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D80CB12A03A for <6man@ietf.org>; Mon, 27 Feb 2017 06:38:34 -0800 (PST)
Received: from opfedar03.francetelecom.fr (unknown [xx.xx.xx.5]) by opfedar21.francetelecom.fr (ESMTP service) with ESMTP id 9011310040D; Mon, 27 Feb 2017 15:38:33 +0100 (CET)
Received: from Exchangemail-eme2.itn.ftgroup (unknown [xx.xx.31.21]) by opfedar03.francetelecom.fr (ESMTP service) with ESMTP id 7730518007B; Mon, 27 Feb 2017 15:38:33 +0100 (CET)
Received: from OPEXCLILMA3.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup ([fe80::60a9:abc3:86e6:2541]) by OPEXCLILM6C.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup ([fe80::d9f5:9741:7525:a199%18]) with mapi id 14.03.0319.002; Mon, 27 Feb 2017 15:38:33 +0100
From: <mohamed.boucadair@orange.com>
To: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>, "6man@ietf.org" <6man@ietf.org>
Subject: OFFLIST RE: on the need for documentation addresses of all types
Thread-Topic: OFFLIST RE: on the need for documentation addresses of all types
Thread-Index: AdKRByq2FbFrgb3YTi+4qwCyqF8Pew==
Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2017 14:38:32 +0000
Message-ID: <787AE7BB302AE849A7480A190F8B933009E1916C@OPEXCLILMA3.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup>
Accept-Language: fr-FR, en-US
Content-Language: fr-FR
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.168.234.1]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/Qd_feXsq1Tb67zsO9_tpU-TtuHM>
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: "IPv6 Maintenance Working Group \(6man\)" <ipv6.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ipv6/>
List-Post: <mailto:ipv6@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2017 14:38:37 -0000

Hi Michael, 

FWIW, multicast documentation prefixes are already defined in RFC6676.

For example, we are making use of those in https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-softwire-dslite-multicast-18: 

   IPv4 and IPv6 addresses used in this example are derived from the
   IPv4 and IPv6 blocks reserved for documentation, as per [RFC6676].
   The unicast IPv4 address of the above example is derived from the
   documentation address block defined in [RFC6890].

Cheers,
Med

> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : ipv6 [mailto:ipv6-bounces@ietf.org] De la part de Michael Richardson
> Envoyé : lundi 27 février 2017 15:24
> À : 6man@ietf.org
> Objet : on the need for documentation addresses of all types
> 
> 
> rfc3849 gives us 2001:DB8::/32 for use in documentation.
> 
> I find that I am often giving example addresses in fe80:: (Link Local),
> and
> fd00::/8 (ULA) addresses when those prefixes are appropriate for the
> protocol.   I worry that someone will think the numbers I've chosen are
> special in some way.  There are clearly far less concern about duplication
> since both spaces are designed to be duplicated (LL) and
> not-guaranteed-to-be-unique (ULA).
> 
> I'd still be happier if someone google'ed the prefixes in the document,
> and
> found that they were documentation examples.
> 
> I'd also like to have three additional documentation prefixes from GUA
> space so that examples involving inner and outer addresses, and senders
> and
> receivers could be better distinguished.  Yes, we currently can carve
> /48 blocks out of 2001:DB8::/32 for this purpose, but it would be nice if
> the pattern was even more unique.
> 
> Would it also be useful to have documentation addresses for the multicast
> ranges, and the like?
> 
> --
> Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>ca>, Sandelman Software Works
>  -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-
> 
>