On Tue, Feb 1, 2011 at 3:38 PM, Chuck Anderson <c...@wpi.edu> wrote: > On Tue, Feb 01, 2011 at 03:14:57PM -0800, Owen DeLong wrote: >> On Feb 1, 2011, at 2:58 PM, Jack Bates wrote: >> > There are many cases where ULA is a perfect fit, and to work >> > around it seems silly and reduces the full capabilities of IPv6. I >> > fully expect to see protocols and networks within homes which will >> > take full advantage of ULA. I also expect to see hosts which don't >> > talk to the public internet directly and never need a GUA. >> > >> I guess we can agree to disagree about this. I haven't seen one yet. > > What would your recommended solution be then for disconnected > networks? Every home user and enterprise user requests GUA directly > from their RIR/NIR/LIR at a cost of hunderds of dollars per year or > more? >
You might be asking the wrong person for advice or reasoning. Horses for courses. ULAs have a place. Cameron