> The chairs would like to make everyone aware of the following draft: > > draft-huston-ip6-iana-registry-01.txt > > The draft sets forth some proposals for updating the IANA registry > for IPv6 addresses. Currently, the registry does not align with > the existing IPv4 address registry or RFC 3513. The authors request > community review and comments.
Minor comment: it would be nice if the first table used a notation like "0000::/8", "0800::/6" instead of the abbreviated notation (0::/8). This would make the map easier to grasp. Major comment: I can foresee several occasions where the IETF will want to allocate an unicast address prefix for a specific purpose. Some are fairly large event, allocating a large block, e.g. a /16 for 6to4, a /7 for ULA. The current registry management is adequate for these large allocations. But some are very small events, allocating a /32 (e.g. for Teredo) or maybe a /48 (e.g. for various special services). Which part of the registry will we use for these small allocations? What is the procedure? -- Christian Huitema -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
