Clarify IPv6 host prefix uniqueness in deployment README

[markus-hentsch]

The current form of the documentation uses the term "host prefix" without clearly specifying that it is meant to be strictly unique per host, leaving only the term itself suggesting that detail. Since this is in contrast to, e.g., ULA IPv6 address behavior and classic subnet scoping, this should be stated explicitly in the documentation to avoid misconfiguration.

Summary by CodeRabbit

• Documentation
  • Added deployment guidance requiring each host’s loopback IPv6 /64 prefix to be unique and not shared with other hosts.

[coderabbitai]

No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉

ℹ️ Recent review info

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Organization UI

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro Plus

Run ID: eb30a3f1-a801-4e6a-9d57-f7708a3bb0e1

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between de6d9d4 and 1f33985.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)

• docs/deployment/README.md

Included review availability: Your plan provides up to 1 included review per hour; 0 remain after this review.

---

📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

The deployment README now states that each host must use a unique IPv6 /64 prefix that is not shared with another host.

Changes

Deployment IPv6 Prefix

Layer / File(s)	Summary
Document IPv6 prefix requirement docs/deployment/README.md	The deployment README requires each host's IPv6 /64 prefix to be unique and not shared with other hosts.

Estimated code review effort: 1 (Trivial) | ~2 minutes

Merge Risk: ⚪ Minimal · up to 1f339

This localized documentation clarification does not change runtime behavior or production configuration, and no actionable merge-blocking risk remains.

Suggested reviewers: adracus

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 4 | ❌ 1

❌ Failed checks (1 warning)

Check name	Status	Explanation	Resolution
Description check	⚠️ Warning	The description clearly explains the documentation change and its purpose. It does not use the required template headings, proposed-change bullets, or the “Fixes #” field.	Add the required “# Proposed Changes” section with the proposed changes listed as bullets, and include the “Fixes #” field. Keep the existing explanation as supporting context.

✅ Passed checks (4 passed)

Check name	Status	Explanation
Title check	✅ Passed	The title clearly and concisely describes the main change: clarifying that IPv6 host prefixes must be unique.
Docstring Coverage	✅ Passed	No functions found in the changed files to evaluate docstring coverage. Skipping docstring coverage check. Docstring coverage is scoped to functions touched by this diff. Analyzed 0 functions across 0…
Linked Issues check	✅ Passed	Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.
Out of Scope Changes check	✅ Passed	Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.

Full details: Docstring Coverage

Explanation

No functions found in the changed files to evaluate docstring coverage. Skipping docstring coverage check. Docstring coverage is scoped to functions touched by this diff. Analyzed 0 functions across 0 files. (1 skipped: 1 unsupported.)

• Fix all pre-merge checks with AI

✨ Finishing Touches

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• Create PR with unit tests

---

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands.}

[mkalcok]

More clarity in the documentation is always welcome. Thank you.

Note though, that the commit needs to be signed off.

[markus-hentsch]

Note though, that the commit needs to be signed off.

Done.

[mkalcok]

Thanks.