IPv6 Prefix Length Recommendation for Forwarding
draft-boucadair-6man-prefix-routing-reco-03
| Document | Type |
Replaced Internet-Draft
(individual)
Expired & archived
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Authors | Mohamed Boucadair , Alexandre Petrescu | ||
| Last updated | 2015-01-20 (Latest revision 2014-09-24) | ||
| Replaced by | draft-ietf-v6ops-cidr-prefix | ||
| RFC stream | (None) | ||
| Intended RFC status | (None) | ||
| Formats | |||
| Stream | Stream state | (No stream defined) | |
| Consensus boilerplate | Unknown | ||
| RFC Editor Note | (None) | ||
| IESG | IESG state | Replaced by draft-ietf-v6ops-cidr-prefix | |
| Telechat date | (None) | ||
| Responsible AD | (None) | ||
| Send notices to | (None) |
This Internet-Draft is no longer active. A copy of the expired Internet-Draft is available in these formats:
Abstract
The length of IP prefixes is an information used by forwarding and routing processes is policy-based. As such, no maximum length must be assumed by design. Discussions on the 64-bit boundary in IPv6 addressing revealed a need for a clear recommendation on which bits must be used by forwarding decision-making processes. This document sketches a recommendation to be followed by forwarding and routing designs with regards to the prefix length. The aim is to avoid hard-coded routing and forwarding designs that exclude some IP prefix lengths.
Authors
Mohamed Boucadair
Alexandre Petrescu
(Note: The e-mail addresses provided for the authors of this Internet-Draft may no longer be valid.)