Comments on PIO-X in draft-pioxfolks-6man-pio-exclusive-bit-01

In addition to asking how is this draft helping with DHCPv6 Prefix
Delegation,

I suggest addition of the following references.

Where draft-pioxfolks-6man-pio-exclusive-bit-01 says:
>    There are several initiatives that propose network side practices
>    that provide customer isolation, enhanced operational scalability,
>    power efficiency, security and other benefits in IPv6 network
>    deployments.  Some of these involve isolating a host (or RA accepting
>    client node) so that the host is the only node to receive a specific
>    prefix, including
>
>    o  DHCPv6 Prefix Delegation to hosts (<https://tools.ietf.org/html/
>       draft-templin-v6ops-pdhost>), and
>
>    o  advertising a unique prefix per host via unique RAs.
>       (<https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-v6ops-unique-ipv6-prefix-
>       per-host>).

it makes sense to add:

    o  Prefix Delegation extensions to ND protocol have been introduced
       in <draft-kaiser-nd-pd-02>, <draft-lutchann-ipv6-delegate-
       option-00> and <draft-haberman-ipngwg-auto-prefix-02>, and
       probably earlier.

Alex

Le 04/03/2017 à 06:31, Alexandre Petrescu a écrit :
> I do not oppose a slot presenting PIO-X if time allows.
>
> However, as I understand it, PIO-X has a single goal - that to
> accomodate 64share.
>
> I wonder whether PIO-X could work with DHCPv6-PD?  Would PIO-X help
> DHCPv6-PD deployment?
>
> This is what I am going to ask at the mic.
>
> Alex
>
>
>
> Le 01/03/2017 à 11:27, Erik Kline a écrit :
>> Ole,
>>
>> It's on me to get a -02 of PIO-X written and uploaded.  Might it be
>> possible to get 5 minutes on that?
>>
>> -ek
>>
>> On 27 February 2017 at 06:16, <otroan@employees.org
>> <mailto:otroan@employees.org>> wrote:
>>
>>     The 6MAN chairs are planning the meeting in Chicago at IETF98.
>>
>>     If you have a draft you would like to discuss, please send your
>>     request for agenda time to the 6man chairs.   Please include in the
>>     request, the title of the presentation, file name of the draft, the
>>     speaker's name (and email), and how much time you would like.
>>
>>     We will prioritise drafts that are working group items and drafts
>>     that have been actively discussed on the list.
>>
>>     We expect at least half of each talk’s presentation time to be used
>>     for open discussion,
>>     please plan your presentation accordingly.
>>
>>     New drafts not discussed on the mailing list prior to the meeting,
>>     or drafts that do not appear to have support from the working group
>>     are unlikely to get time at the meeting.
>>
>>     Please have agenda items to us by 2017-03-15.
>>
>>     Regards,
>>
>>     Bob & Ole
>>
>>     --------------------------------------------------------------------
>>     IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
>>     ipv6@ietf.org <mailto:ipv6@ietf.org>
>>     Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
>>     <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6>
>>     --------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
>> ipv6@ietf.org
>> Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
> ipv6@ietf.org
> Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>