On 19/07/2018 21:57, Juliusz Chroboczek wrote:
> I've re-read Section 6.5 of 7788, and it looks like I was wrong.  Sorry,
> I should not be writing technical mails in the middle of the night.
> 
> As far as I can tell from the wording of 6.5:
> 
>   - creating ULA is SHOULD if there's no global IPv6, MUST NOT otherwise;
>   - creating private IPv4 is MAY if there's no global IPv4, MUST NOT 
> otherwise.
> 
> If my reading is correct, that sucks.  I don't see how the MAY can be
> implemented, since there's no obvious way to distinguish global from local
> IPv4, and if you don't implement the MAY, then you'll lose local IPv4
> whenever your IPv4 provider has a glitch, as you described.
> 
>> if you have a connection over IPv4 and suddenly your IPv4 network is
>> deconfigured, your connection will hang.
> 
> The point Brian and I are trying to make is that you should have no
> intra-Homenet IPv4 traffic -- your applications should prefer IPv6 to
> IPv4, and and there should always be IPv6 in your Homenet.
> 
> Unfortunately, our point is made moot by the first MUST NOT above, since
> the ULA becomes deprecated whenever there's global IPv6.

Yes, that should perhaps be revisited. But deprecated means: not to be used
for *new* connections, which shouldn't kill existing connections.

   Brian

_______________________________________________
homenet mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet

Reply via email to