new addressing plan

[Pedro Marques]

>>>>> "Matt" == Matt Crawford <crawdad@FNAL.GOV> writes:

    >> And simply swaping 010 with 001 and moving the reserved fields
    >> around will give us the new address format from rfc 1897.
    >> 
    >> my proposal:
    >> 
    >>    | 3 |  5 bits  |  16 bits |   24 bits  | 16 bits| 64 bits   |
    >>    +---+----------+----------+------------+--------+-----------+
    >>    |   |          |Autonomous|    IPv4    | Subnet |           |
    >>    |001|  11111   |  System  |   Network  |        |           |
    >>    |   |          |  Number  |   Address  | Address|    EID    |
    >>    +---+----------+----------+------------+--------+-----------+
    Matt> This isn't consistent with
    Matt> draft-ietf-ipngwg-unicast-aggr-00.txt.

That depends if you consider that the bit where a boundary lies is
significant. I believe the above is pretty much consistent with the
idea of agregation by provider or large struture.

But it was just a straw-man proposal... feel free to move the bits around.

But anyway from the sample on the mailing list it seams people prefer a
registry delegation based scheme to an automatic one...

  Pedro.