RE: Review request: draft-huston-ip6-iana-registry-01.txt

At 06:00 AM 16/12/2004, Christian Huitema wrote:
> > The chairs would like to make everyone aware of the following draft:
> >
> > draft-huston-ip6-iana-registry-01.txt
>
> > The draft sets forth some proposals for updating the IANA registry
> > for IPv6 addresses.  Currently, the registry does not align with
> > the existing IPv4 address registry or RFC 3513.  The authors request
> > community review and comments.
>
>Minor comment: it would be nice if the first table used a notation like
>"0000::/8", "0800::/6" instead of the abbreviated notation (0::/8). This
>would make the map easier to grasp.

thanks for this - I'll make this alteration in the next version of the draft.

>Major comment: I can foresee several occasions where the IETF will want
>to allocate an unicast address prefix for a specific purpose. Some are
>fairly large event, allocating a large block, e.g. a /16 for 6to4, a /7
>for ULA. The current registry management is adequate for these large
>allocations. But
>some are very small events, allocating a /32 (e.g. for Teredo) or maybe
>a /48 (e.g. for various special services). Which part of the registry
>will we use for these small allocations? What is the procedure?

This particular draft does not look at the allocation procedures per se - 
but the intent of the draft would be to ensure that all IANA allocations 
are recorded in a uniform fashion in the registry in a format that is both 
clear and machine parseble.

Geoff

--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
ipv6@ietf.org
Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------