Re: [Int-area] Re: Last Call: 'An IPv6 Prefix for Overlay Routable Cryptographic Hash Identifiers (ORCHID)' to Experimental RFC (draft-laganier-ipv6-khi)

[Geoff Huston <gih at apnic.net>]

> But this is enough about my opinions.  Please
> state your opinion -- in the interest of not
> replicating this discussion on multiple lists,
> send follow-ups to ietf at ietf.org.


3 last call comments:

Firstly Section 2 describes the prefix as a 28 bit quantity, yet 
section 7 (IANA Considerations) is not specific I suggest: adding 
"/28 prefix" to the text in Section 7 (IANA Considerations)

Secondly, in Section 7 the IANA allocation is described as 
"temporary", yet there is no definition of what "temporary" means in 
this context. The authors should be consulted to define "temporary" 
in terms of clear instructions to IANA (e.g. unitil otherwise 
instructed by the IESG, or for 5 years from the data of the allocation,  etc).

Thirdly, given that these IDs are not intended to be used in a 
conventional sense of unicast addresses, then the IESG should 
carefully consider why this allocation should be made from unicast 
IPv6 address space. The draft does not provide a clear and coherent 
rationale for such an allocation in my personal opinion. However, at 
the size of a /28 this is more a point of principle than anything 
else, and the IESG may be of the view that the requested allocation 
is sufficiently small so as to present no particular concern one way 
or another.

regards,

    Geoff Huston


_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf