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

I agree, and pretty much my point. The project is self described as
"proof-of-concept", and as it appears to be  using a deprecated range
within a private overlay, it should not in itself be an impediment to this
draft.

nb

On Tue, Jun 1, 2021 at 5:01 PM Mark Smith <markzzzsmith@gmail.com> wrote:

>
>
> 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
>>
>