The risk to the DFZ of leaking ULA-* {routes, packets, whatever}
keeps coming up on this list. I thought I'd try to address just that
problem in isolation, just to see whether I'm hearing things right.
Please attack the following.
1. With PI address space there is an expectation of global utility
(or, reachability across the DFZ, or however you want to describe
"useful on the Internet"). I said expectation, not guarantee.
2. With ULA-* address space there would be no expectation of global
utility. In fact, there would be an expectation that the addresses
are for local use only (for some definition of "local").
3. There is doubt that any ULA-* address space would be kept properly
local in all cases. In fact, there is an expectation that {routes,
packets, something} would leak.
4. If some leaks are tolerated, then maybe, eventually, all leaks
will be tolerated. Let's assume that will happen, just to see where
it takes us.
5. If everybody has non-PA addresses (be they PI or ULA-*) and they
are all leaked to the Internet, then the DFZ will suffer state
explosion.
6. If operators can distinguish between should-be-local addresses
(ULA-*) and allowed-to-be-global addresses (PI) in ASICs then
operators can filter in order to head off the cataclysm looming in (5).
7. Since people were told up-front that their ULA-* addresses were no
good for use on the Internet, step (6) shouldn't cause anybody to
lock and load their lawyers.
(6) and (7) above ring true for ULA-* but not for PI-for-all. So, ULA-
* would not harm the DFZ in the way that PI-for-all might harm the DFZ.
Joe
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
ipv6@ietf.org
Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------
