[bcop] IPv6 prefix delegation BCOP document available for comments and suggestions

On 03/04/2017 15:55, Nathalie Trenaman wrote:
> Hi Jan,
>
> Great doc, and very readable. Thanks to all the authors for their input.
> I went over the doc with the eyes of a newbie to this stuff and found
> some areas for clarification.

Hi Nathalie,

Thank you for review, much appreciated!!!

>
> In section 3, we mention "end-user" for the first time, without
> explaining what an end-user is in this context.. In our courses we have
> to make that explanation sooner than later, because different audiences
> read different things in the word “end-user”...
   <snip/snap>
> 4.2
> “If the CPE knows that the delegated prefix has changed it should send
> out RA packets”
> Write Router Advertisements.

Agree.

I implemented in the document majority of the above suggestions, thnx 
again for making this document better!

>
> Did the authors consider images to explain certain concepts? For example
> bit boundary? RIPE NCC can help with that, if you wish.

Should we? Isn't teaching the subnetting a little bit out of the scope 
of this document? Or would you like to replace the existing attempts to 
show the nibble boundaries in the document?

Cheers and thnx, Jan

>
> I hope this input is useful.
>
> Thanks again!
>
> Nathalie Künneke-Trenaman
> IPv6 Program Manager
> RIPE NCC
>
>
>> On 27 Mar 2017, at 15:30, Jan Zorz - Go6 <jan at go6.si
>> <mailto:jan at go6.si>> wrote:
>>
>> Dear RIPE BCOP community,
>>
>> As promised at last RIPE meeting in Madrid, we produced a first draft of
>> "Best Current Operational Practice for operators: IPv6 prefix assignment
>> for end-users - static (stable) or dynamic (non-stable) and what size to
>> choose."
>>
>> The aim of this document is to document the best current operational
>> practice on what size of IPv6 prefix ISPs should assign/delegate to
>> their customers and should they delegate it in a stable, static way or
>> should it change over time.
>>
>> Please find the PDF attached and also accessible at:
>>
>> https://www.sinog.si/docs/draft-IPv6pd-BCOP-v1.pdf
>>
>> We are submitting this document to RIPE BCOP TF (here) to check if
>> this is a
>> real best operational practice and get consensus on it. We are also
>> submitting this document to RIPE IPv6 WG to check the technical validity
>> of the document and also get consensus on it.
>>
>> Please, read the document and send back comments to this mailing list.
>> All feedback is more than welcome.
>>
>> On behalf of co-authors, Jan Žorž
>>
>> P.S: This document is not intended to document what practices may
>> be in future and what they might look like, but to reflect the best
>> methods of implementing IPv6 at the time of publication. Updates to this
>> document will be published to reflect changes in best current practices
>> where there are developments in standards and implementations.
>> <draft-IPv6pd-BCOP-v1.pdf>
>