Subject: Documentation Prefix

From: Bob Hinden <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 03 Feb 2003 09:34:37 -0800

Patrick Grossetete just pointed out to me that there is already a prefix 
allocated (by APNIC) for documentation.  It is:

	2001:0DB8::/32

For more details see:

   http://www.apnic.org/info/faq/ipv6-documentation-prefix-faq.html#3

Since I don't think we need two, I will remove the one I proposed from 
<draft-ietf-ipv6-unicast-aggr-v2-00.txt> and submit a new draft.

Bob

--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List
IPng Home Page:                      http://playground.sun.com/ipng
FTP archive:                      ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng
Direct all administrative requests to [email-masked]
--------------------------------------------------------------------

---

From: Alain Durand <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 06 Feb 2003 13:16:29 -0800

Bob,

There are some unanswered questions about this APNIC prefix:
1- Can people who are not member of APNIC use this prefix?
2- How do people who are not APNIC members know about this prefix?
     i.e. how an implementor familiar with the RFC series but unaware
     of APNIC documents will know that such a prefix has been reserved?
3- What about the other RIRs? Are they going to recommend to use
     this prefix or are they going to reserve some others?

Perhaps a separate very short Informatinal RFC pointing to
a common RIR policy (once/if established) will help.

    - Alain.

Bob Hinden wrote:

> Patrick Grossetete just pointed out to me that there is already a 
> prefix allocated (by APNIC) for documentation.  It is:
>
>     2001:0DB8::/32
>
> For more details see:
>

---

From: Bob Hinden <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 06 Feb 2003 16:59:41 -0800

Alain,

>1- Can people who are not member of APNIC use this prefix?

I don't see why not as it isn't supposed to be routed.

>     of APNIC documents will know that such a prefix has been reserved?

Good question.  I wasn't aware of it until Patrick Grossetete pointed it 
out to me.

>     this prefix or are they going to reserve some others?

I would hope there would only be one assignment by the RIRs.  It would be 
ironic if after all this time of trying to get a prefix for documentation, 
we get several :-)

>a common RIR policy (once/if established) will help.

I will forward you email to Paul Wilson at APNIC.  I think that what APNIC 
did was well intended, it might have been better if the IANA had done the 
allocation as it is not a regional issue and it might have been better to 
pick a prefix that was not in the middle of other assignments.

Thanks,
Bob

---

From: Patrick Grossetete <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 07 Feb 2003 09:47:54 +0100

I sent several requests to IANA but never got an answer, neither 
an acknowledgement...

Patrick

>pick a prefix that was not in the middle of other assignments.

____________________________________________
Patrick Grossetete
Cisco Systems
Internet Technology Division (ITD) - Product Manager
			
Phone/Vmail: 33.1.58.04.61.52	
Fax: 33.1.58.04.61.00	
mobile: 33.6.19.98.51.31	
Email:[email-masked]	
11 Rue Camille Desmoulins
92782 Issy les Moulineaux Cedex 9
France
____________________________________________

---

From: Brian E Carpenter <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 07 Feb 2003 13:20:34 +0100

I'm not surprised. For something at this level I
would recommend having the IAB write to IANA, if we
end up needing IANA action. But if the various RIRs
are in agreement about this, I think we are OK.

   Brian

---

From: Philip Smith <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 08 Feb 2003 17:03:29 +1000

Hi Brian,

I proposed the documentation prefix as a policy proposal at the APNIC Open 
Policy Meeting in Kitakyushu last August. Seemed a logical place, given 
that the RIRs allocate address space, and APNIC is the RIR for the region I 
live and work in.

The APNIC Policy Special Interest Group approved the proposal, and the 
member meeting agreed that the proposal should become APNIC policy. 
Following on from this, the documentation prefix became APNIC policy at the 
start of December.

Both ARIN and the RIPE NCC indicated to me that should they get any 
requests for an IPv6 documentation prefix they will refer to the APNIC 
allocation 
(http://www.apnic.net/info/faq/ipv6-documentation-prefix-faq.html). I don't 
think anyone sees regionalisation being a problem - it's simply one prefix 
which will be included in the IPv6 bogon filters ISPs currently implement.

An internet-draft is currently "in the works", hopefully we can get this 
out asap; that should help with any awareness issues still left in the 
community.

However, I do humbly apologise for not letting this working group know that 
the allocation had been made, a regrettable oversight in a very busy year 
end for me. :-(

philip
--