Fred, Organizationally, I agree with your asersion that referencing another document to describe the sub-delegation behavior gives some wiggle room. -KE
________________________________ From: Fred Baker [mailto:f...@cisco.com] Sent: Mon 7/27/2009 6:09 AM To: IETF IPv6 Mailing List Cc: draft-donley-ipv6-cpe-rtr-use-cases-and-r...@tools.ietf.org; draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-rou...@tools.ietf.org Subject: Comments on IPv6 Prefix Subdelegation Let me make an introductory comment on: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-baker-ipv6-prefix-subdelegation "Prefix Sub-delegation in a SOHO/SMB Environment", Fred Baker, 27- Jul-09, <draft-baker-ipv6-prefix-subdelegation-00.txt> In IPv6 Operations, we have two posted documents right now that comment on prefix subdelegation. These are: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-donley-ipv6-cpe-rtr-use-cases-and-reqs "Use Cases and Requirements for an IPv6 CPE Router", Chris Donley, Deepak Kharbanda, John Jason Brzozowski, Yiu Lee, Jason Weil, Kirk Erichsen, Lee Howard, Jean-Francois Tremblay, 2-Jul-09, <draft-donley-ipv6-cpe-rtr-use-cases-and-reqs-00.txt> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router "IPv6 CPE Router Recommendations", Hemant Singh, Wes Beebee, 25- Mar-09, <draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-00.txt> The premise is that an ISP might delegate a PA prefix to a SOHO/SMB network, perhaps using DHCP or etc. It would be nice if the prefix could be in turn sliced into /64 prefixes and sub-delegated to the various LANs in the subsidiary network. draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router is trying to recommend to vendors that they should build CPE routers in a certain way, and specifies in part how sub-delegation would work. In my opinion as WG chair, I would rather that it said "do RFC X" than "do the following algorithm", as one might want to change the algorithm and the proposed algorithm has not been proven operationally. In general, I would like 6man to take on the work of describing that algorithm. I threw draft-baker-ipv6-prefix-subdelegation together very quickly for the purpose of saying "I would want you to reference something like <this>". That said, it is at least a first step, and may be the right answer for the moment. I would appreciate it if 6man could take a look at the discussion on sub-delegation in the two CPE drafts and at this draft, and decide first whether the draft is a reasonable first step toward solving the problem that the CPE drafts target, and then further decide whether and with what authors they would like to finish that discussion. I'm throwing no personal ego in here - if someone else would like to respond to the question, less work on my part sounds good to me. Your opinions, please... 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. -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------