Hi, Jan and all,

As RFC3849 specified, the prefix reserved for documentation is a /32 block,
     2001:DB8::/32
while people can use the following:
     net A = 2001:db8:1::/48
     net B = 2001:db8:2::/48
     net C = 2001:db8:3::/48
we can also use
     net A = 2001:db8:1::/48
     net B = 2001:db8:8000::/48
     net C = 2001:db8:a000::/48
for being easy recognized as separated networks.
The only shortcoming that I can think of is, because 2001:db8::/32 is one big block, when being used to describe
inter-domain network topology, /32 address block may easily be considered as all networks belong to one organization.
Any comment?

I also cc:ed this email to the co-author of RFC3849, G.Huston, Chief Scientist from APNIC, for further discussion.

Best regards,
--MA Yan

----- reply email -----
Sender:Jan Zorz @ go6.si <jan@go6.si>
Recipient:bcop <bcop@ripe.net>
Time:08/21/2014 22:11:55
Subject:[bcop] Fwd: [Bcop-gc] documentation ipv6 prefix


Dear RIPE BCOP community,

I got a question from Seiichi Kawamura, JANOG BCOP co-chair and I think
this suggestion/question would be best if discussed here on this mailing
list (and maybe also on IPv6 WG ml).

Please read below.

Cheers, Jan

-------- Original Message --------
Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2014 10:04:56 +0900
From: Seiichi Kawamura <kawamucho@mesh.ad.jp>

Fellow BCOPers

Hi there.
Some folks in Japan, especially tech
bloggers and tech documentation producers
are saying that we need more ipv6 documentation
prefix than just 2001:db8::/32

When describing a classic 3 prefix
network topology they would use

net A = 2001:db8:1::/48
net B = 2001:db8:2::/48
net C = 2001:db8:3::/48

where as with v4,

net A = 192.0.2.0/24
net B = 198.51.100.0/24
net C = 203.0.113.0/24

The 3 IPv6 prefixes are too similar and it's
intuitively hard to tell if the 3 prefixes are
talking about a network, or is it 3 separate networks.
I guess this is bad especially for educational
tutorial documentation.

So I'm thinking that if there are 2 more prefixes
defined as documentation, I would say that's enough.
We can maybe even revive 3ffe:: and make that documentation purpose.

However, I'm intersted in hearing opinions from other regions.
Do you think there are any such needs in your region?

-Seiichi

_______________________________________________
Bcop-gc mailing list
Bcop-gc@elists.isoc.org
https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/bcop-gc