In message <00f801cd05a2$abfce190$03f6a4b0$@[email protected]>, "Marc Lampo" write
s:
> Hello,
> 
> +1 for Brian's statement : ULA within same /48, prefer ULA.
> 
> For ULA not within same /48 :
> Please do not forget VPN !
> In the IPv4 world, numerous devices, with private address space,
> Communicate through site-to-site VPN's.
> I'd assume this is equivalent to "ULA not in same /48".
> How could an end-device decide whether or not VPN is in place ?
> 
> Wouldn't it be preferable to let "name resolving" decide which address
> to return to a client ?
> And if name resolving returns ULA, let end-device use ULA as well.
> (If there is no VPN in place, it would be a configuration error
>  in the name resolving infrastructure)
> That way, network admins decide centrally, trough name resolving,
> how some party is can be reached.
> 
> Any errors there would be name resolving which can, through DNS,
>  be centrally solved.
> As opposed to some "smart" algorithm on end nodes that mistakingly
>  choses the wrong address (and requiring some update on all of them ...)
> 
> Kind regards,
> 
> Marc Lampo

Are connecting a node or a net over the VPN?

For a node this is a non-issue as the VPN's interface will be in
one ULA and home net in the other ULA.  The node is a site boundary.

If you are connecting a net then you can do PD request(s) and
advertise the returned prefixes.  If the upstream starts to run out
of prefixes they just generate a additional ULA prefix and number
all the servers from it.  Different VPN use different ULA but all
can reach the central servers.  By the time a organisation reaches
this level of complexity they are a small ISP in their own right
and should be able to get /32.

Mark
-- 
Mark Andrews, ISC
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742                 INTERNET: [email protected]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
[email protected]
Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply via email to