In message <CAKD1Yr2Hw1V_JHxvqh_BfzFAsMxe_SifvW_GW4J40X=srps...@mail.gmail.com> , Lorenzo Colitti writes: > > On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 7:17 AM, Mark Townsley <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Great idea. I won't be in Orlando, but I am fairly sure there is nothing > > > I would do there that cares about address persistency, apart from > > > having to reconnect to jabber maybe. Conducting an RFC 4192 procedure > > > on Tuesday night and a flash IPv6 renumbering during Thursday morning > > > would be very interesting! > > > > We might as well toss in some ULAs as well. > > > > Hmm. Do we know for sure that all clients properly depref ULAs below global > addresses (either because they follow RFC6724 instead of RFC3484, or > because they implement the longest prefix matching rule?) If not, some > clients might break. Longest match works well enough 2001/2002 have 14 bits in common. fc00 has no bits in common with 2001 or 2002. I've been using ULA PA addresses together at home for years without issue.
Mark -- Mark Andrews, ISC 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: [email protected] _______________________________________________ homenet mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
