[ipv6-wg] IPv6 Prefix delegation BCOP version 3 is out...

On 27/07/2017 17:49, Ondřej Caletka wrote:

> Let me try to rephrase this paragraph:
>> 
>> Some operators also use /126, /127, /112 or an alternative prefix
>> assignment instead of /64 for managed links where addresses on the
>> link are manually configured, and according to RFC6164, a /127 is
>> suggested,  to prevent, among others, the Neighbor Discovery
>> exhaustion attack (RFC6583). Please note, that not all equipment
>> currently supports this option, so /64 is still the safest approach
>> and has the advantage of being future proof in the event that new
>> standards make usage of the other 64 bits for other purposes or the
>> link becomes point-to-multipoint, etc. Furthermore, some ISP
>> hardware has limitations in using prefixes longer than /64, so the
>> use of non-/64 prefixes will use more resources on these devices.
>> If we decide to use /127 for each point to point link, then it is
>> also advisable to allocate a /64 for each link and use just one
>> /127 out of it.

Hi,

Thnx for this add-on. I fixed the text and here it goes the v.5
(hopefully the last one, if the stars are positioned properly ;) )

https://www.sinog.si/docs/draft-IPv6pd-BCOP-v5.pdf

> 
> Other than that, I found no more issues.
> 
> PS: I also noticed that https://www.sinog.si has an invalid TLSA
> record ;)

Thnx for pointing this out. It was not the TLSA taht was broken, it was
my dnssec signer that played some tricks, but on that domain only.
Go-figure ;)

It should be fixed now.

Cheers and thnx, Jan


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 3976 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
URL: </ripe/mail/archives/ipv6-wg/attachments/20170727/1b17ce1a/attachment.p7s>