Re: [v6ops] Fwd: I-D Action: draft-ietf-v6ops-6204bis-05.txt

[Ray Hunter <[e-mail]>]

Thanks.

Maybe not on your network, but apparently there are operators out there 
who are forcing router manufacturers to do the best they can with a 
single delegated /64 per end user site.

So why not then quote RFC6177 as an additional normative reference for 
6204bis?

quote rfc6177 > One particular situation that must be avoided is having 
an end site feel compelled to use IPv6-to-IPv6 Network Address 
Translation or other burdensome address conservation techniques because 
it could not get sufficient address space.

quote rfc6177 >  a site, by definition, implies multiple subnets and 
multiple devices

Both quotes seem to be pertinent advice, so that this particular corner 
case is avoided altogether in 6204bis.

regards
RayH

STARK, BARBARA H wrote:
> 6204bis is a CE router requirements document. Not an operator 
> requirements document.
>
> RFC 6177 provides guidance regarding assignment of IPv6 prefixes to 
> end sites. Since this RFC already exists, and was recently published, 
> I see no need to try to write it again at this time.
>
> Barbara