[address-policy-wg] 2018-02 Assignment Clarification in IPv6 Policy - comments from today meeting

Hi all,

I've been asked to state what is the problem.

I think it was clear in my slides, but anyway, here we go with all the problems I see:

1) The current policy text says "Providing another entity with separate addresses (not prefixes)".
 To me this is inconsistent addresses instead of an address vs not-prefixes.

2) If the end-device need a /64 instead of a single address, as per RFC8273, then it is breaking the actual policy.

3) If we allow sub-assignments, what is then the difference in between IPv6 PA and PI ?

So, I think it is clear we have not just one problem?

Now, if we want to go further. Do we have the same problem with IPv4 if, for example a university, instead of using NAT, they also sub-assign public IPv4 addresses to students?

Inputs?

Regards,
Jordi
 
 



**********************************************
IPv4 is over
Are you ready for the new Internet ?
http://www.consulintel.es
The IPv6 Company

This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive use of the individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited and will be considered a criminal offense. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited, will be considered a criminal offense, so you must reply to the original sender to inform about this communication and delete it.