IPv6 - real vs theoretical problems

Tim Chown tjc at ecs.soton.ac.uk
Fri Jan 7 08:32:41 CST 2011


On 7 Jan 2011, at 06:11, Owen DeLong wrote:
> 
> That's a draft, and, it doesn't really eliminate the idea that /48s are generally
> a good thing so much as it recognizes that there might be SOME circumstances
> in which they are either not necessary or insufficient.
> 
> As a draft, it hasn't been through the full process and shouldn't be considered
> to have the same weight as an RFC.
> 
> While it intends to obsolete RFC-3177, it doesn't obsolete it yet and, indeed, may
> never do so.

The IETF data tracker shows draft-ietf-v6ops-3177bis-end-sites is under IESG review, with comments currently being made, see 
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-v6ops-3177bis-end-sites/
which also notes the draft has strong support so is likely to be published soon.

The document is only guidance regardless.

Tim



More information about the NANOG mailing list