Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-6man-rfc4291bis-07.txt> (IP Version 6 Addressing Architecture) to Internet Standard

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 





On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 12:46 PM, Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 2:42 AM, Mark Smith <markzzzsmith@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Let's leave behind unnecessary practices that have been used to extend IPv4's life, and that make things unnecessarily complicated and more costly to operate and troubleshoot.

What he said. 


I like this as well, I'm not convinced that any of mark's problems won't show up in v6 networks though, even if the mandate (and hardware/software fixes the mandate) is /64 only... people do dumb things, we can't really stop them.

I don't see how the proposed wording makes this more complicated, for MOST things people will just pick the default /64 and never look back (because their upstream will be doing SLAAC and they won't even really 'pick').

For cases where people need (or feel the need) another prefix length 'RECOMMENDED'  means they can, they are adults, they can (and will) do what they want.

-chris


[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]