On 2012-05-07 00:59, Mark Andrews wrote: > See the nanog thread starting here: > http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/2012-May/048079.html >
I'm sure the intention was to reserve the entire /10 prefix but it's correct that the RFC is not clear about this. Seems like an erratum is needed. Brian -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
