Re: [v6ops] Reused deprecated prefix (0200::/7)

On Wed, 2 Jun 2021, 07:54 Nick Buraglio, <buraglio@es.net> wrote:

> Did we ever see a response to this? My take is that if the prefix is not
> being used for its original intended purpose, then it is functionally
> squatting on deprecated address space. A read of the project notes looks as
> if it is still pre-production code similar in nature to ZeroTier or the
> Slack nebula, the former of which is able to leverage both rfc4193 and
> 6plane as its addressing schema. While no one can expect to control what is
> used on private networks and projects, I don't see this particular issue as
> a show stopper for this particular draft, assuming this is in use as a
> private addressing schema and not as rfc4548. Based on the site, that
> appears to be the case:
>
> *Yggdrasil uses the 0200::/7 range, which is a range deprecated by the
> IETF. It has been deprecated since 2004, pending changes to an RFC which
> simply never materialised 14 years later. It was decided to use this range
> instead of fc00::/7 (which is more typically allocated to private networks)
> in order to prevent conflicts with existing ULA ranges.*
>

This last statement doesn't make sense and isn't justification for using
this deprecated range.

 ULAs have a 40 bit random number in them "*to prevent conflicts with
existing ULA ranges."*

>
> nb
>
>
>
> On Sun, May 23, 2021 at 3:51 PM Brian E Carpenter <
> brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Alexander,
>>
>> Do you mean that the prefix is being used as specified in RFC1888 or in
>> some other way?
>>
>> On a technical detail, the prefix is marked as "reserved" by IANA. The
>> logic for that is that if anybody is using 0200::/7 on the public Internet
>> for its original experimental purpose, it cannot also be used for any other
>> purpose. What is "deprecated" is the method in RFC1888.
>>
>> Regards
>>    Brian Carpenter
>>
>> On 23-May-21 21:47, Александр
>> Иванов wrote:
>> > Hello, v6ops maillist members,
>> >
>> > I want to talk about the 0200::/7 prefix, which is officially
>> deprecated (RFC4048), but actually used from 2017 to now.
>> >
>> > There's a project called Yggdrasil Network - a self-arranging encrypted
>> IPv6 network (https://yggdrasil-network.github.io/) <
>> https://yggdrasil-network.github.io/)> which utilizes this deprecated
>> prefix ...and its network already has members that use it for business
>> purposes.
>> >
>> > How do you think about allocating that prefix as a software-routed
>> global unicast address? A future RFC can be merged with
>> draft-horley-v6ops-expand-doc-00.
>> >
>> > I highly appreciate any feedback and help for new to the IETF.
>> >
>> > Regards,
>> > ~ Alexander Ivanov, Russia
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > v6ops mailing list
>> > v6ops@ietf.org
>> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops
>> >
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> v6ops mailing list
>> v6ops@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops
>>
> _______________________________________________
> v6ops mailing list
> v6ops@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops
>