[address-policy-wg] 2016-04 New Policy Proposal (IPv6 PI Sub-assignment Clarification)

Anno domini 2016 Leo Vegoda scripsit:

Hi Leo,

> > > So prefix delegation is OK as long as the prefix is longer than a /64?
> > 
> > Technically that's what the proposal is currently proposing. I'm curious 
> > about the opinions of working group members about that.

> Taking no position on the proposal itself, I'd like to draw people's
> attention to RFC 7421 (Analysis of the 64-bit Boundary in IPv6 Addressing).

Thanks for the pointer.

> Section 4.4 deals with Implementation and Deployment Issues and might be a
> helpful read when considering a proposal that might lead to significant
> pressure to deploy infrastructures designed to delegate prefixes longer than
> /64.

The proposal should not by any means induce preassure to delegate such
prefixes. By "delegate" I think of a "routed delegation", like a prefix
which on the last hop of the organisations infrastructure being an entry
in the FIB and not configured locally.

The whole idea of PI space is that it's not "delegateable" following the
above definition. The proposal doesn't want to change that. The goal
is to allow use of PI space in the organisations infrastructure and
allow the use of prefixies (a /64 for example) in networks open to
guest or the general public to stress this example.

Best
Max
-- 
They that give up essential liberty to obtain temporary safety,
deserve neither liberty nor safety.  (Ben Franklin)