Re: [v6ops] draft-moreiras-v6ops-rfc3849bis-00

Owen DeLong <> Sat, 17 August 2013 08:00 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 93F5F21F99F4 for <>; Sat, 17 Aug 2013 01:00:35 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.6
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, NO_RELAYS=-0.001]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Zddr3oGffRt6 for <>; Sat, 17 Aug 2013 01:00:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2620:0:930::200:2]) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 55CEC21F99DE for <>; Sat, 17 Aug 2013 01:00:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [IPv6:2620::930:0:ca2a:14ff:fe3e:d024] ([IPv6:2620:0:930:0:ca2a:14ff:fe3e:d024]) (authenticated bits=0) by (8.14.2/8.14.1) with ESMTP id r7H7tajg016389 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT); Sat, 17 Aug 2013 00:55:36 -0700
X-DKIM: Sendmail DKIM Filter v2.8.3 r7H7tajg016389
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=simple/simple;; s=mail; t=1376726138; bh=m+EsfWVEFZGVG/QPgIzi7+a+gIw=; h=Content-Type:Mime-Version:Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Message-Id:References:To; b=p0NKbq+LWPzxfoHLmncOIXJ6qeM1m+L0E8z17DxIKDFEC+TcgRv1KlWeIY0nAvwjn /zktIOnQMq7zdF/PAXMKSfrZ8zQbdEG2n1uUDhzqy9oUfT0lIhGdyzBblBmloeeSrK QQioBl3WLWzoxQRfOvJh1nT3T7zpRqWM3CPDtxcQ=
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.5 \(1508\))
From: Owen DeLong <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Date: Sat, 17 Aug 2013 00:55:36 -0700
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <>
References: <> <> <>
To: "Fred Baker (fred)" <>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1508)
X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0rc1 ( [IPv6:2620:0:930::200:2]); Sat, 17 Aug 2013 00:55:38 -0700 (PDT)
Cc: Alejandro Acosta <>, " WG" <>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] draft-moreiras-v6ops-rfc3849bis-00
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: v6ops discussion list <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 17 Aug 2013 08:00:35 -0000

On Aug 16, 2013, at 14:12 , "Fred Baker (fred)" <> wrote:

> Dumb question.
> I wonder if there is a less expensive way to go about this. By expensive, I mean "choke. you want a /20?". It has been argued that we need something that is shorter than a /32, and that we need something for ULAs. Whatever we do, it needs to be consistent with class examples that need to get typed into operational equipment. There's a lot more that has been said, but that's what I draw out of it.
> What if we shortened 2001:db8::/32 to 2001:db8::/29? I note that the prefix doesn't show up in, and the IANA counterpart mentions it only in a footnote.

I think at least a /28 is necessary. I'm not entirely convinced that a /20 is needed, but I can see good argument for a /24.

> We could also delegate fc00:db8::/29, or something longer (/44 perhaps, allowing for the description of several ULA prefixes in documentation but not chewing up as much address space), by the same logic.

I think this would be fine (even at the /44 level).

> I see the argument, but not for the size requested.

I'll leave it to Antonio et. al to justify a /20, but I'd like to see us get at least a /28.