Subject: RE: IPv6 w.g. Last Call on "Deprecating Site Local Addresses"

From: "Christian Huitema" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2003 11:45:56 -0800

>  > 4   Deprecation
>  >
>  >   This document formally deprecates the IPv6 site-local unicast
prefix
>  >   defined in [RFC3513], i.e. 1111111011 binary or FEC0::/10. The
>  >   special behavior of this prefix MUST no longer be supported in
new
>  >   implementations.
> 
> I think this section is not ready yet. Couple comments:
> 
> 1) This is not the IETF job to mandate what an implemention choose
>     to support or not.

Sure. An implementation may choose to give a special meaning to a
special prefix, say "DEAD:BEEF::/32", and the IETF cannot do anything
about it. However, the whole purpose of the deprecation draft is, well,
to deprecate site local addresses. These addresses use to have a special
meaning, an expectation that they can only reach "on site" nodes. The
special meaning is not supported any more. Applications must not expect
it to be supported. Do you have an alternative writing?

> 2) What constitute a "new implementation"?
>     For example, we shipped IPv6 in Solaris 8. Same bits plus extra
>     features in Solaris 9, more coming in newer relases, but
fundamentally
>     the same code fundation. Would Solaris 10, 11, 12, 13, 14....
>     or what ever new name we come up with be considered as "new
> implemtations"?
>     This is confusing...

Alternative text for "new implementation" would be welcome. I guess that
the intent is clear.

> 3) What does section 4 exactly means with regard to default address
> selection RFC3484?
>     Does this obsolete the rules about scope?

Well, we still have link local scope, so there is still that. Do you
suggest that we write a line for each of the RFC that currently mention
site local and explain how to change them?

-- Christian Huitema

--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
[email-masked]
Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------

---

From: Tim Chown <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2003 19:52:26 +0000

> site local and explain how to change them?

It would be interesting to know how many such references there are.

But given the existing site-local usage willcontinue until at least we
have a replacement, it seems premature to make any updates until the
replacement is hardened?

Tim

---

From: Alain Durand <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2003 12:11:48 -0800

Christian Huitema wrote:

>> >   defined in [RFC3513], i.e. 1111111011 binary or FEC0::/10. 
>>
>>

Suggested text to address both comments:

replace:
"The special behavior of this prefix MUST no longer be supported in new 
implementations."

by

"The special behavior of this prefix MUST no longer be supported."

>site local and explain how to change them?
Precisely. There are not that many of them. If you go through the archives,
you'll find a post where I made the list of places that either mentioned
FECO:: or site local. Or a simple grep in the RFC pages will do.

    - Alain.