Skip to main content

Autonomic IPv6 Edge Prefix Management in Large-Scale Networks

Approval announcement
Draft of message to be sent after approval:


From: The IESG <>
To: IETF-Announce <>
Cc:, The IESG <>,, Toerless Eckert <>,,,,
Subject: Document Action: 'Autonomic IPv6 Edge Prefix Management in Large-scale Networks' to Informational RFC (draft-ietf-anima-prefix-management-07.txt)

The IESG has approved the following document:
- 'Autonomic IPv6 Edge Prefix Management in Large-scale Networks'
  (draft-ietf-anima-prefix-management-07.txt) as Informational RFC

This document is the product of the Autonomic Networking Integrated Model and
Approach Working Group.

The IESG contact persons are Warren Kumari, Benoit Claise and Terry Manderson.

A URL of this Internet Draft is:

Ballot Text

Technical Summary

   Relevant content can frequently be found in the abstract
   This document describes an autonomic solution for IPv6 prefix
   management at the edge of large-scale ISP networks, with an extension
   to support IPv4 prefixes.  An important purpose of the document is to
   use it for validation of the design of various components of the
   autonomic networking infrastructure.

Working Group Summary

This document was called draft-jiang-anima-prefix-management
prior to its adoption. There was consenus support for it in favor of 
adoption, so this document was adopted in January 2016. There was
interest in this work posts since its adoption. There was no opposition
to this work.
This document went through a relevant long document development
period (15 months for individual document period,  30 month for WG 
document period). It has been reviewed well.

Document Quality

Huawei has expressed interest in implementation.
There is a prototype implementation at:


Toerless Eckert is the document shepherd.
Terry Manderson is the responsible AD.


The IANA is requested to add two names to GRASP Objective Names Table
registry defined by [I-D.ietf-anima-grasp] (registry already crated).
 "PrefixManager" and "PrefixManager.Params". I did review/discuss these
names during shepherd review. I think these allocations establish
a useful precedent of making multiple objectives of one functional area
use a common prefix.

RFC Editor Note