Hi David, On 27.09.2011 23:28, David Farmer wrote: > I'm warming to the idea. However if we do something like this for the > manufacturing world we better move forward normal ULA-C for the
The current ULA-C has the problem of allocating /48s. A manufacturer would have to request many of them and the fixed 16-bit subnet ID structure given in the spec isn't suitable for many of these applications. > enterprise guys that want ULA otherwise you will quickly burn through > your 21 - bit OUI. It won't just be manufactures that use this form of For OUI exhaustion I don't agree. The currently public OUI assigned numbers of IEEE are around 16.000. Maybe this isn't directly comparable, but provides at least a rough estimate. > ULA (how about ULA-M, for ULA-Manufacturing) if it is created without a > more standard ULA-C available for the enterprise guys. Yep, regards Roland -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list [email protected] Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
