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

"Fred Baker (fred)" <> Fri, 16 August 2013 21:12 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3769921F9D8D for <>; Fri, 16 Aug 2013 14:12:44 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -110.566
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-110.566 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.033, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id jy66kKPRqMdy for <>; Fri, 16 Aug 2013 14:12:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1188E11E8159 for <>; Fri, 16 Aug 2013 14:12:37 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple;;; l=920; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1376687557; x=1377897157; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-id:content-transfer-encoding: mime-version; bh=FqieOw6dVShgFuWlu0m/n2bi9gmkbMcIX45pLCkRZcA=; b=PaREypINJlNEwaDGtpnb0ilUTdh4QJH84OmQYnoM/pIYAyhYES4KcJF0 F/GWAQ2RiROwtwSi8+RXc4ViYViLIHU+NzVSylxe+JsmrY/lJeQxWK0Qm NG1QOsFUsscDH2hK5r5aY1xng2GjfBH/FLfHclUueauqqXrX6cGcbKHYJ 4=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AucFAM6UDlKtJV2d/2dsb2JhbABbgwaBBoJTvE2BKxZ0giUBAQQ6PxACAQgiFBAyJQIEAQ0NiAi5N48CgRsCMQeDG3cDqTmDHIIq
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.89,897,1367971200"; d="scan'208";a="248341573"
Received: from ([]) by with ESMTP; 16 Aug 2013 21:12:36 +0000
Received: from ( []) by (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r7GLCWWT014386 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Fri, 16 Aug 2013 21:12:32 GMT
Received: from ([]) by ([]) with mapi id 14.02.0318.004; Fri, 16 Aug 2013 16:12:31 -0500
From: "Fred Baker (fred)" <>
To: "Antonio M. Moreiras" <>, Alejandro Acosta <>
Thread-Topic: [v6ops] draft-moreiras-v6ops-rfc3849bis-00
Thread-Index: AQHOmsVSl6fzlrtx9kmFZAMhzasS+Q==
Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2013 21:12:31 +0000
Message-ID: <>
References: <> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
x-originating-ip: []
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: " 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: Fri, 16 Aug 2013 21:12:44 -0000

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.

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 see the argument, but not for the size requested.