On 22 Oct 2011, at 01:18, Hemant Singh (shemant) wrote: Note the IETF IPv6 CE router specifies use of the ULA in the home to keep the home network independent of the SP network. This way my computer at home can still print to the printer even when my SP IPv6 network is down. We have said this multiple time in v6ops during development of the IPv6 CE router RFC 6204.
Thanks for the reminder. FWIW, I believe the consensus _is_ for ULAs within the home network, although I do see a few vocal opponents. I don’t have the time to read the copious emails of homenet, but seeing some emails here and there I see homenet regressing on issues that are closed in the v6ops IPv6 CE router document development. Examples of issues homenet is regressing on is ND Proxy and use of zospf for prefix delegation in the LAN. There was only one cell phone vendor who was asking us for ND Proxy with a single /64 PD delegated to the phone. We convinced the vendor at the Prague IETF to abandon that idea because such a /64 would need RA Proxy in the CE router and RA Proxy is not defined is any RFC. Thus the vendor agreed and decided to go with DHCPv6 PD of RC 3633. That is why ND Proxy was removed from the cpe rtr bis document. Will those arguing for ND Proxy please stand up and be counted? Zospf was also closed in v6ops that it’s not possible to use for prefix delegation in the LAN. Here is an email to v6ops on closure on ospf for prefix delegation. Again, thanks, that's useful background. Ray
_______________________________________________ homenet mailing list homenet@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
