Subject: 6bone phaseout plan for your comments

From: Bob Fink <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2003 18:22:12 -0700

v6ops wg Folk,

As many of you may know, Bob Hinden and I have been developing a 
6bone-phaseout plan since January of this year. Mostly the discussions have 
taken place on the 6bone list, with the RIRs and at a BOF meeting at the 
San Francisco IETF. The general consensus is to now ask for it to be 
published as an RFC to finalize it.

I have asked Randy Bush, as Operations AD for IPv6 transition, to process 
it through the IESG/IETF processes for BCP. I would also encourage any 
review comments you may have.

The ID is at:

<http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-fink-6bone-phaseout-03.txt>

Thanks,

Bob Fink

---

From: "JORDI PALET MARTINEZ" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2003 12:55:21 +0200

I'm ok with this.

Regards,
Jordi

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Bob Fink" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 2003 3:22 AM
Subject: 6bone phaseout plan for your comments

> <http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-fink-6bone-phaseout-03.txt>

*****************************
Madrid 2003 Global IPv6 Summit
Presentations and videos on-line at:
http://www.ipv6-es.com

---

From: "Marcin Michalak" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2003 14:15:29 +0200

> <http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-fink-6bone-phaseout-03.txt>
Hi,
 Just small typo: page 2: 'TEST=NEW' should be 'TEST-NEW'. Otherwise -
 good and concise :-)
  Regards,
   Marcin

----------------------------------------------------------
Marcin Michalak		Research Engineer
Mobile: +41 79 330 83 51	Telscom AG

---

From: "Craig A. Huegen" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2003 09:43:20 -0500 (Central Daylight Time)

This looks good, Bob.

/cah

-- 
Craig A. Huegen, Chief Network Architect      C i s c o  S y s t e m s
IT Transport, Network Technology & Design           ||        ||
Cisco Systems, Inc., 400 East Tasman Drive          ||        ||
San Jose, CA  95134, (408) 526-8104                ||||      ||||
email: [email-masked]       CCIE #2100      ..:||||||:..:||||||:..

---

From: Alain Durand <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2003 16:22:56 -0700

Just read the -04.

Comments:

     Address prefixes from the 3FFE::/16 allocation, using a set of 6bone
     routing practice rules specified in [GUIDE], and later refined to
     6Bone backbone routing guidelines in [PRACTICE]

==> Chronologically, [PRACTICE, RFC 2546] was produced before [GUIDE, RFC 2772]

     It is anticipated that under this phaseout plan the 6bone will cease
     to operate by June 6, 2006, with all 6bone prefixes fully reclaimed
     by the IANA.

==> There is something diabolic about this date!

     Thus after the 6bone phaseout date June 6, 2006, it is the intent
     that no 6bone 3FFE prefixes, of any size/length, be used on the
     Internet in any form. Network operators may filter 3FFE prefixes on
     their borders to ensure these prefixes are not misused.

This is contradictory to 

     There is experience from the IPv4 world that such filters may not be
     removed promptly should this address space be reallocated, and it is
     recommended that the IANA bears this in mind before reallocating it
     in a manner that would require it to be routed globally within the
     current Internet.

The prefix belongs to IANA. The 6bone is returning it to IANA,
it is up to IANA to do whatever they want with it. We may recommend
not to re-attribute it in the near future, but the sentence:
"it is the intent that no 6bone 3FFE prefixes, of any size/length, be 
used on the Internet in any form."
implies that the prefix 3ffe::/16 would die forever.

I'd rather like to see a sentence like "the 3ffe::/16 prefix SHOULD not 
be used and MUST NOT be reallocated
until 1/1/2012. Network operator MAY filter 3FFE prefixes on their 
border until 1/1/2012
to ensure these prefixes are not misused." After 1/1/2012, the prefix 
would return to the global pool
of aggregatable addresses

    - Alain.

Bob Fink wrote:

> 6bone-phaseout plan since January of this year. Mostly the discussions 
> have taken place on the 6bone list, with the RIRs and at a BOF meeting 
> at the San Francisco IETF. The general consensus is to now ask for it 
> to be published as an RFC to finalize it.
>
> I have asked Randy Bush, as Operations AD for IPv6 transition, to 
> process it through the IESG/IETF processes for BCP. I would also 
> encourage any review comments you may have.
>
> The ID is at:
>