> This sounds like "provider independent" which is a very > different ballgame. > > The point of ULAs is not that they are independent of any > particular provider, they're independent of any and all > connectivity to the internet at large.
I agree that a ULA-C RFC must state that these addresses are not the same as "provider independent" addresses and that they are intended for connectivity that does not involve the public Internet. I think it would be reasonable for the RFC to contain a definition of "provider independent" something like the following: Provider Independent addresses are global unicast addresses that have been allocated to an organization directly by one of the RIRs. As part of the agreement between the RIR and the organization receiving the allocation, these addresses are considered to be for the use of the receiving organization regardless of how they connect to the public Internet. > I don't think this is "widely" held, but it's certainly vocally held. Totally agree on this. > Since addresses are only usable when a rather large part of > the internet accepts routes for them, it seems rather strange > to make this assumption in the presence of explicit standards > language that these addresses are NOT to be used in this way. > I.e., the argument is that the entire internet is going to to > something which is undesireable if these addresses are > created. However, if the entire internet is doing it, > wouldn't that action by definition be desireable (regardless > of whether it's a good idea)? That is a mouthful, but it does seem sensible to assume that either the public Internet will NOT allow ULA-C addresses to be used as PI addresses, or, they will allow it, in which case this is what the operators of the public Internet want. In either case, the IETF only provides the signal as to what is appropriate. It cannot force operators to act one way or another. Does anyone know what is happening with the ULA-G draft? http://sa.vix.com/~vixie/ula-global.txt --Michael Dillon. -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list [email protected] Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
