> ULA is LOCAL. > > It has nothing to do with PI. > > People need address space to number the links between their > SQL and web servers. This is completely orthogonal to address > space used on the internet.
Agreed! > If it's routed at some point, this means we're all getting > enough money to change our minds on the merits of routing > unroutable space so by definition, we'll be happy with that. In other words, any arguments that say "but people will take that address block and use it on the public Internet" apply equally to people who use a 3FFE block or just pick some random address block that is not in use. The only thing that stops people from doing this is ISPs policing the BGP routes that they hear which will also stop ULA use. In a way, people are right when they have a gut feel that ULA-C addresses are just like PI addresses. But they forget that they are also like any other unicast IPv6 address. All addresses work everywhere on the Internet, except where they are filtered/policed and ULA-C addresses will be filtered just like any other kind of address which is technically usable, but defined by policy as unusable. > And again: keep the RIRs out of this, this has nothing to do > with their current business. Really, this is none of our business. When push comes to shove, the IANA is responsible for registering numbers and if they want to delegate the job to RIRs, then they will. --Michael Dillon -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list [email protected] Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
