[LAC-TF] Fwd: BCP 157, RFC 6177 on IPv6 Address Assignment to End Sites

[Harold de Dios T.]

Rompe o complementa lo descrito en el manual de Sander Steffann?

Saludos,
Harold.
El 3/27/11 1:12 PM, "Arturo Servin" <aservin at lacnic.net> escribió:

> 
> Creo que esto puede ser de utilidad para tomar en cuenta al momento de hacer
> sus planes de direccionamiento de IPv6.
> 
> Como dato, este RFC y BCP sustituyen al RFC 3177.
> 
> Saludos,
> -as 
> 
> Begin forwarded message:
> 
>> From: rfc-editor at rfc-editor.org
>> Date: 27 March 2011 11:47:08 CEST
>> To: ietf-announce at ietf.org, rfc-dist at rfc-editor.org
>> Cc: v6ops at ietf.org, rfc-editor at rfc-editor.org
>> Subject: BCP 157, RFC 6177 on IPv6 Address Assignment to End Sites
>> 
>> 
>> A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries.
>> 
>>         BCP 157 
>>         RFC 6177
>> 
>>         Title:      IPv6 Address Assignment to End
>>                     Sites
>>         Author:     T. Narten, G. Huston,
>>                     L. Roberts
>>         Status:     Best Current Practice
>>         Stream:     IETF
>>         Date:       March 2011
>>         Mailbox:    narten at us.ibm.com,
>>                     gih at apnic.net,
>>                     lea.roberts at stanford.edu
>>         Pages:      9
>>         Characters: 21231
>>         Obsoletes:  RFC3177
>>         See Also:   BCP0157
>> 
>>         I-D Tag:    draft-ietf-v6ops-3177bis-end-sites-01.txt
>> 
>>         URL:        http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6177.txt
>> 
>> RFC 3177 argued that in IPv6, end sites should be assigned /48 blocks
>> in most cases.  The Regional Internet Registries (RIRs) adopted that
>> recommendation in 2002, but began reconsidering the policy in 2005.
>> This document obsoletes the RFC 3177 recommendations on the
>> assignment of IPv6 address space to end sites.  The exact choice of
>> how much address space to assign end sites is an issue for the
>> operational community.  The IETF's role in this case is limited to
>> providing guidance on IPv6 architectural and operational
>> considerations.  This document reviews the architectural and
>> operational considerations of end site assignments as well as the
>> motivations behind the original recommendations in RFC 3177.  Moreover,
>> this document clarifies that a one-size-fits-all recommendation of /48 is
>> not nuanced enough for the broad range of end sites and is no longer
>> recommended as a single default.
>> 
>> This document obsoletes RFC 3177.  [STANDARDS-TRACK]
>> 
>> This document is a product of the IPv6 Operations Working Group of the IETF.
>> 
>> 
>> BCP: This document specifies an Internet Best Current Practices for the
>> Internet Community, and requests discussion and suggestions for
>> improvements. Distribution of this memo is unlimited.
>> 
>> This announcement is sent to the IETF-Announce and rfc-dist lists.
>> To subscribe or unsubscribe, see
>>   http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce
>>   http://mailman.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-dist
>> 
>> For searching the RFC series, see http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfcsearch.html.
>> For downloading RFCs, see http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc.html.
>> 
>> Requests for special distribution should be addressed to either the
>> author of the RFC in question, or to rfc-editor at rfc-editor.org.  Unless
>> specifically noted otherwise on the RFC itself, all RFCs are for
>> unlimited distribution.
>> 
>> 
>> The RFC Editor Team
>> Association Management Solutions, LLC
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> IETF-Announce mailing list
>> IETF-Announce at ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> LACTF mailing list
> LACTF at lacnic.net
> https://mail.lacnic.net/mailman/listinfo/lactf

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mail.lacnic.net/pipermail/lactf/attachments/20110328/15739d9d/attachment.html>