On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 1:24 AM, Markus Stenberg <markus.stenb...@iki.fi> wrote:
> > From my point of view, it should be SHOULD _always_ generate ULA (so that > privacy oriented things in a home have a sane default without need for > trusting firewalling), and MUST generate if no GUA around. > I don't understand [and I'm not sure I like seeing it] this clause about "privacy oriented things" and "trusting firewalling" in the context of RFC 4193 unique local addressing. I suspect there is some conflation with RFC 1918 privacy addressing happening there [which is why I am frowning]. On the topic of the original question, if I were to editorialize here, then I would want to see something like this: A) An autonomously generated ULA prefix SHOULD be advertised when no other delegated prefix is valid. B) Whenever there is any valid delegated prefix, advertisements for an existing autonomously generated ULA prefix MUST be deprecated, i.e. updated with preferred lifetime of zero. C) A deprecated autonomously generated ULA prefix MUST be withdrawn when it expires, i.e. its valid time reaches zero. D) Whenever there is no longer any valid delegated prefix, advertisements for a previously deprecated autonomously generated ULA prefix MUST be updated with non-zero preferred lifetime. The idea here is to make sure IPv6 applications can generally rely on home network interior routers to forward traffic among the multiple links in the home, regardless of whether any first-mile Internet services are provisioned, configured and operational, i.e. there shall always be at least one preferred global scope network prefix, and there shall be an autonomously generated local prefix available as a last resort whenever there are no valid delegated prefixes. -- james woodyatt <j...@nestlabs.com> Nest Labs, Communications Engineering
_______________________________________________ homenet mailing list homenet@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
