6547
INFORMATIONAL

RFC 3627 to Historic Status

Authors: W. George
Date: February 2012
Area: int
Working Group: 6man
Stream: IETF
Obsoletes: RFC 3627
Updates: RFC 6164

Abstract

This document moves "Use of /127 Prefix Length Between Routers Considered Harmful" (RFC 3627) to Historic status to reflect the updated guidance contained in "Using 127-Bit IPv6 Prefixes on Inter- Router Links" (RFC 6164). A Standards Track document supersedes an informational document; therefore, guidance provided in RFC 6164 is to be followed when the two documents are in conflict. This document links the two RFCs so that the IETF's updated guidance on this topic is clearer. This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is published for informational purposes.

RFC 6547: RFC 3627 to Historic Status [RFC Home] [TEXT|PDF|HTML] [Tracker] [IPR] [Info page]

INFORMATIONAL
Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)                         W. George
Request for Comments: 6547                             Time Warner Cable
Obsoletes: <a href="./rfc3627">3627</a>                                            February 2012
Updates: <a href="./rfc6164">6164</a>
Category: Informational
ISSN: 2070-1721


                      <span class="h1">RFC 3627 to Historic Status</span>

Abstract

   This document moves "Use of /127 Prefix Length Between Routers
   Considered Harmful" (<a href="./rfc3627">RFC 3627</a>) to Historic status to reflect the
   updated guidance contained in "Using 127-Bit IPv6 Prefixes on Inter-
   Router Links" (<a href="./rfc6164">RFC 6164</a>).  A Standards Track document supersedes an
   informational document; therefore, guidance provided in <a href="./rfc6164">RFC 6164</a> is
   to be followed when the two documents are in conflict.  This document
   links the two RFCs so that the IETF's updated guidance on this topic
   is clearer.

Status of This Memo

   This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is
   published for informational purposes.

   This document is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force
   (IETF).  It represents the consensus of the IETF community.  It has
   received public review and has been approved for publication by the
   Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG).  Not all documents
   approved by the IESG are a candidate for any level of Internet
   Standard; see <a href="./rfc5741#section-2">Section 2 of RFC 5741</a>.

   Information about the current status of this document, any errata,
   and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at
   <a href="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6547">http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6547</a>.















<span class="grey">George                        Informational                     [Page 1]</span>

<span id="page-2" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6547">RFC 6547</a>                  <a href="./rfc3627">RFC 3627</a> Is Historic             February 2012</span>


Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2012 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors.  All rights reserved.

   This document is subject to <a href="https://www.rfc-editor.org/bcp/bcp78">BCP 78</a> and the IETF Trust's Legal
   Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
   (<a href="http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info">http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info</a>) in effect on the date of
   publication of this document.  Please review these documents
   carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
   to this document.  Code Components extracted from this document must
   include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
   the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
   described in the Simplified BSD License.

Table of Contents

   <a href="#section-1">1</a>.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . <a href="#page-3">3</a>
   <a href="#section-2">2</a>.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . <a href="#page-3">3</a>
   <a href="#section-3">3</a>.  Acknowledgements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . <a href="#page-3">3</a>
   <a href="#section-4">4</a>.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . <a href="#page-4">4</a>
     <a href="#section-4.1">4.1</a>.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . <a href="#page-4">4</a>
     <a href="#section-4.2">4.2</a>.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . <a href="#page-4">4</a>

<span class="h2"><a class="selflink" id="section-1" href="#section-1">1</a>.  Introduction</span>

   This document moves "Use of /127 Prefix Length Between Routers
   Considered Harmful" [<a href="./rfc3627" title=""Use of /127 Prefix Length Between Routers Considered Harmful"">RFC3627</a>] to Historic status in accordance with
   <a href="./rfc2026">RFC 2026</a> [<a href="./rfc2026" title=""The Internet Standards Process -- Revision 3"">RFC2026</a>].  <a href="./rfc3627">RFC 3627</a> has been superseded by "Using 127-Bit
   IPv6 Prefixes on Inter-Router Links" [<a href="./rfc6164" title=""Using 127-Bit IPv6 Prefixes on Inter- Router Links"">RFC6164</a>].  A Standards Track
   document supersedes an informational document; therefore, guidance
   provided in <a href="./rfc6164">RFC 6164</a> is to be followed when the two documents are in
   conflict.  This may not have been clear to casual readers who are not
   familiar with the differences in IETF document types.  This document
   adds the necessary link between the two RFCs so that users referring
   to <a href="./rfc3627">RFC 3627</a> for guidance will see that it has been obsoleted by
   updated guidance on the matter, thus hopefully eliminating any
   confusion that may be present.

<span class="h2"><a class="selflink" id="section-2" href="#section-2">2</a>.  Security Considerations</span>

   This document introduces no new security considerations.

<span class="h2"><a class="selflink" id="section-3" href="#section-3">3</a>.  Acknowledgements</span>

   Thanks to Brian Carpenter, Bob Hinden, and Ron Bonica for guidance on
   the matter, and to Pekka Savola and Miya Kohno and the other authors
   of 6164 for their support.



<span class="grey">George                        Informational                     [Page 2]</span>

<span id="page-3" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6547">RFC 6547</a>                  <a href="./rfc3627">RFC 3627</a> Is Historic             February 2012</span>


<span class="h2"><a class="selflink" id="section-4" href="#section-4">4</a>.  References</span>

<span class="h3"><a class="selflink" id="section-4.1" href="#section-4.1">4.1</a>.  Normative References</span>

   [<a id="ref-RFC3627">RFC3627</a>]  Savola, P., "Use of /127 Prefix Length Between Routers
              Considered Harmful", <a href="./rfc3627">RFC 3627</a>, September 2003.

   [<a id="ref-RFC6164">RFC6164</a>]  Kohno, M., Nitzan, B., Bush, R., Matsuzaki, Y., Colitti,
              L., and T. Narten, "Using 127-Bit IPv6 Prefixes on Inter-
              Router Links", <a href="./rfc6164">RFC 6164</a>, April 2011.

<span class="h3"><a class="selflink" id="section-4.2" href="#section-4.2">4.2</a>.  Informative References</span>

   [<a id="ref-RFC2026">RFC2026</a>]  Bradner, S., "The Internet Standards Process -- Revision
              3", <a href="https://www.rfc-editor.org/bcp/bcp9">BCP 9</a>, <a href="./rfc2026">RFC 2026</a>, October 1996.

Author's Address

   Wesley George
   Time Warner Cable
   13820 Sunrise Valley Drive
   Herndon, VA  20171
   US

   Phone: +1 703-561-2540
   EMail: [email protected]

























George                        Informational                     [Page 3]

Additional Resources