Subject: Re: [v6ops] New Version Notification for draft-palet-v6ops-rfc6177-bis-02.txt

From: JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 09 Oct 2018 10:58:40 +0200

Hi all,

We have a new version of this document:

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-palet-v6ops-rfc6177-bis/?include_text=1

Inputs welcome!

Regards,
Jordi

-----Mensaje original-----
De: <[email-masked]>
Fecha: martes, 9 de octubre de 2018, 10:57
Para: Jordi Palet <[email-masked]>, Jordi Palet Martinez <[email-masked]>, Rosalea G Roberts <[email-masked]>, Rosalea Roberts <[email-masked]>
Asunto: New Version Notification for draft-palet-v6ops-rfc6177-bis-02.txt

    A new version of I-D, draft-palet-v6ops-rfc6177-bis-02.txt
    has been successfully submitted by Jordi Palet Martinez and posted to the
    IETF repository.
    
    Name:		draft-palet-v6ops-rfc6177-bis
    Revision:	02
    Title:		IPv6 Address Assignment to End-Sites
    Document date:	2018-10-09
    Group:		Individual Submission
    Pages:		11
    URL:            https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-palet-v6ops-rfc6177-bis-02.txt
    Status:         https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-palet-v6ops-rfc6177-bis/
    Htmlized:       https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-palet-v6ops-rfc6177-bis-02
    Htmlized:       https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-palet-v6ops-rfc6177-bis
    Diff:           https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-palet-v6ops-rfc6177-bis-02
    
    Abstract:
       The Regional Internet Registries (RIRs) policies have different views
       regarding the recommendation of the prefix to be assigned to end-
       sites.  However, all them allow up to a /48 without further
       justification and clearly state that the exact choice of how much
       address space should be assigned to end-sites is a decision of each
       operator.
    
       This document reviews the architectural and operational
       considerations of end-site assignments, and reiterates that
       assignment policy and guidelines belong to the RIR community.  This
       revision is being made to emphasize that IPv6 protocol evolution
       requires an ever-increasing availability of subnets at the end-site,
       so policy should reflect that assignment of a single subnet is never
       recommended.
    
       This document obsoletes RFC6177 (IPv6 Address Assignment to End
       Sites).

    
    Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission
    until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.
    
    The IETF Secretariat

**********************************************
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.