On 20 Jun 2007, at 12:07am, Scott Leibrand wrote:
Here's a use case for ULA-C that demonstrates its usefulness, and
demonstrates why reverse DNS for ULA-C blocks is a valuable enough
service that we shouldn't purposefully break it for the public
Internet. Let's say, for example, that I'm a very small ISP with
IPv6 PA space from my upstream(s). I give out subnets of that PA
space to my customers in an automated dynamic fashion, and I don't
run BGP, so I don't need or want PI space.
However, I do have some routers with interfaces that need
numbering, and I'd rather avoid renumbering them when I change
upstreams. Since ULA-C is cheap and easy to get, I register myself
a block of it, and use it to number my router interfaces. Since
I'd rather my customers saw DNS names instead of IPv6 addresses in
their traceroutes, I delegate the reverse DNS for my ULA-C block to
a nameserver on my upstream's PA space, and set up proper PTR
records for all my routers.
Is this not already possible with a /48 PI assignment from ARIN?
Is ULA-C a new solution for a problem that's already been solved with
PI assignments or does it solve a new problem?
Regards,
--
Leo Vegoda
IANA Numbers Liaison
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
[email protected]
Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------
