On Mon, 11 Jun 2007 15:14:04 +0200 "Gunter Van de Velde \(gvandeve\)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I suppose most of these users will have big (actually a quite small) > flat infrastructure > to keep it simple? Hence what limits them to use just LL? Why ULA? What > would be the residential users benefit? Do you think that residential > users will have small routed networks in the future? > I think it would be wise not to preclude the possibility. One thing I'm trying to keep remembering is that while it is easier to understand IPv6 by thinking of it as "IPv4 with bigger addresses", I think it is important to remember it is more than that. Inherent functional constraints in IPv4, mainly due to it's limited addressing, don't or don't have to exist in IPv6. Two examples of things that I don't think can be done with IPv4 and probably weren't thought of being done with IPv6 when the IPv6 addressing size was decided are HIP and ULA addressing. Next year, or 5 or 10 years time we may have more things to add to that list. So, I think it's useful to certainly use IPv4 and it's common deployment scenarios as a basis for how people will probably use IPv6, however I think it is also important not to be trapped by it. I think IPv6 can open up possiblities of solving "IPv4" solved problems in different or better ways. People might have routed ULA networks in their home. Maybe a scenario could be when they come home from work and their Personal Area Network with a ULA prefix, which covers their mobile phone, music player and pedometer in their shoes, connects to their wireless home network with a different ULA. Possibly their mobile phone in this scenario will act as a Wifi to Bluetooth router between the separate ULA prefixes (I think some of the latest high end mobile phones could probably, with a small software upgrade, act in that capacity today 1- from what I understand of their capabilities (3G, Wifi, bluetooth), I'd think the only thing probably missing is the IPv6 routing capability) Regards, Mark. > G/ > > -----Original Message----- > From: Mark Smith > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Sunday, June 10, 2007 1:45 AM > To: Bernie Volz (volz) > Cc: ipv6@ietf.org > Subject: Re: Revising Centrally Assigned ULA draft > > On Sat, 9 Jun 2007 10:06:16 -0400 > "Bernie Volz \(volz\)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > IANA already manages things like enterprise-id numbers. And, then > > there's the existing IPv4 address space (how many assigned addresses > > are returned or reclaimed?). > > > > While ULA's could potentially be used by a much larger number of > > entities, they may also not be used except by larger organizations. Do > > > you think your average home user or small business would need a ULA? > > Would they know to get one? Would they have the knowledge to manage > it? > > > > Any residential user who needs to have non-globally accessible devices > attached to their home network could use them. Think a networked > printer. Or DVD player, or clothes iron, washing machine, TV etc. As I > think it'd be likely that most residential users would have devices that > they don't want "on the Internet", I think ULA addessing domains are > likely to going to be present in every household. > > As for getting a ULA, that's a user interface problem, and I think > that's mostly independent of the addressing space or how to generate the > ULA unique value. A simple enough solution might be that the first time > an Internet home gateway is powered up it generates the ULA, then starts > announcing it as a prefix in RAs. This sort of problem has been solved > before on a number of occasions - IPX, Appletalk or zeroconf could > provide example methods. > > Regards, > Mark. > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > IETF IPv6 working group mailing list > ipv6@ietf.org > Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 > -------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
