Memphis IETF ngtrans-6bone WG minutes

[Bill Fink]

> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> 7. Addressing beyond RFC1987 / Bob Fink
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Bob Fink briefly outlined his desire for the 6bone to follow the new IPv6 addressing plan that he expected to result from the IPng WG meeting later in the week.  He postulated that, if real operational experience and feedback to developers and the IPng WG was a primary goal of the 6bone, that the 6bone should move quickly to adopt a new addressing plan and to test network renumbering.
> 
> Jim Bound expressed his concern that users might not accept the concept of renumbering in the marketplace.
> 
> Bob Fink then asked Bob Hinden to comment as IPng WG co-chair.
> 
> Bob Hinden commented that he would be presenting a preliminary new unicast addressing plan at the IPng WG meeting later in the week, and that this would result in an Internet-Draft shortly therafter.  He also supported experimentation with renumbering as a goal for the 6bone.
> 
> Further discussion was deferred to the mail list.

From one B. Fink to another... :-)

Any idea when this aggregate-based unicast addressing plan I-D will be
available?  Is this supposed to be a replacement for the geographic based
addressing option (format 100) or yet another option?

I'm working on a Federal networks ATM addressing plan, and I'm proposing
to use IPv6 addresses embedded in ATM NSAP addresses.  I was originally
planning to use a geographic based scheme, but perhaps I should check
out this new addressing I-D to see what options it provides.  The bottom
line is I need real IPv6 addresses from some registration authority.
Is a registry for the US / North America defined at this point for any
of the addressing options?

						-Bill