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

"George, Wes" <> Mon, 12 August 2013 20:31 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB21221F9E40 for <>; Mon, 12 Aug 2013 13:31:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.27
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.27 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.468, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_MODEMCABLE=0.768, HOST_EQ_MODEMCABLE=1.368, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, J_CHICKENPOX_13=0.6, J_CHICKENPOX_33=0.6]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id tqEB5iJQZhtN for <>; Mon, 12 Aug 2013 13:31:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 462E821F9CF7 for <>; Mon, 12 Aug 2013 13:31:03 -0700 (PDT)
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos; i="4.89,864,1367985600"; d="scan'208,217"; a="116777817"
Received: from unknown (HELO ([]) by with ESMTP/TLS/RC4-MD5; 12 Aug 2013 16:29:56 -0400
Received: from ([]) by ([]) with mapi; Mon, 12 Aug 2013 16:30:48 -0400
From: "George, Wes" <>
To: Owen DeLong <>
Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2013 16:30:47 -0400
Thread-Topic: [v6ops] draft-moreiras-v6ops-rfc3849bis-00
Thread-Index: Ac6XmX8opnRmDrqBS3G4kRKDcBoV2AAAJ5tg
Message-ID: <>
References: <> <> <> <> <> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_2671C6CDFBB59E47B64C10B3E0BD59230439ABF00CPRVPEXVS15cor_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: Alejandro Acosta <>, "<>" <>, "" <>
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: Mon, 12 Aug 2013 20:31:08 -0000

From: Owen DeLong []

Because in some cases, the lab is also teaching about ULA+GUA configurations.

[WEG] I don't follow your logic. 2001:db8::/32 is not GUA, nor would any such documentation prefix be -quite the contrary, in fact. It just happens to come from 2000::/3 so it *looks* more like GUA, but the network behavior is no different.


On Aug 12, 2013, at 13:05 , "George, Wes" <<>> wrote:

From:<> [<>] On Behalf Of Carlos Martinez-Cagnazzo

As far as I understand, Antonio does some training involving 6RD deployments, where each 'team' needs its own /32. There might be other cases though, like for example doing some work involving BGP routing between different teams and for which you expect each one of them to carve a /32.
[WEG] and that environment can't use ULA because....?

Not saying that there aren't legitimate cases when having more than /32 of documentation space might be useful, just saying that I don't believe the needs of a lab environment (even in the context of training) is necessarily one of them.

Wes George
Anything below this line has been added by my company's mail server, I have no control over it.

This E-mail and any of its attachments may contain Time Warner Cable proprietary information, which is privileged, confidential, or subject to copyright belonging to Time Warner Cable. This E-mail is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient of this E-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, copying, or action taken in relation to the contents of and attachments to this E-mail is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this E-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and permanently delete the original and any copy of this E-mail and any printout.
v6ops mailing list<>