Announcing 2003::/16 during tests of "shipworm"

[Robert J. Rockell]

6bone=testbed

testbed=announce routes that allow people to Test.

I see no reason to not allow *ANY* prefix that has a legit purpose for
testing on the 6bone.  This should in no way break any existing asignments.
Unless I hear something from Working-Group chairs, I will be appending this
prefix to my filters today.

P.S. If any of you have this route in your table now, you aren't abiding by
rfc2772 for filtering anyhow, so I don't see where the room to complain
about it exists.  If you filter strictly, you would not see this route
in your RIB...


Thanks
Rob Rockell
Principal Engineer
SprintLink Europe/Asia
(+1) 703-689-6322
Sprint IP Services : Thinking outside the 435 box
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

On Fri, 7 Dec 2001, Jan Oravec wrote:

->> You may have observed Microsoft announcing reachability of the prefix
->> 2003::/16 over the 6Bone. The appended e-mail sent to the NGTRANS
->> working group explains why. We are currently testing the "Shipworm"
->> protocol, which carries IPv6 through NAT by using encapsulation over
->
->Although I welcome your will to participate on IPv6 protocol development,
->I cannot agree with announcing 2003::/16. There are active production IPv6
->networks over the world already which are connected to 6bone and receiving
->this non-official prefixe. It is the same as advertising 197.0.0.0/8 over
->the Internet which is, according to IANA, reserved prefix.
->
->Anyway, I don't see the point of using the Shipworm. The cleaner solution
->is to configure IPv6 on the box, which provide NAT for the private network.
->
->
->Best Regards,
->
->Jan Oravec
->XS26 - 'Access to IPv6'
->jan.oravec@xs26.net
->