If you change routing equipment, perhaps even upgrade firmware, changing ULA's can be fair game. An instance of the same hardware in the same configuration should have no reason to randomly change ULA addressing.
The discussion of GUA's still orthogonal. It doesn't matter what the ISP policy is if I don't connect, they provide a small chunk of address like a /64, the connection is flaky or broken, I stop paying the bill,or for any other reason I don't have connectivity, I should still be able to have a stable connection across the routed home. In the bridged home this now happens every day with LL's. tom On 3/27/12 2:20 PM, "Ray Bellis" <[email protected]> wrote: > >On 27 Mar 2012, at 23:12, Thomas Herbst wrote: > >> "Fully stable" would be static and I don't think anyone is suggesting >> static. While devices must be able to survive address changes, they >> should not have to change addresses frequently. > ><nohat> > >How often is "frequently"? > >I know of at least one ISP who gives a _dynamic_ /64 to every DSL >customer that happens to negotiate IP6CP that changes each time they >connect. > >> Using ULA's and the availability of Global addressing are orthogonal >> issues. > >+1 > >Ray >> > _______________________________________________ homenet mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
