On Tue, 2007-11-20 at 15:28 +1300, Brian E Carpenter wrote: > On 2007-11-12 22:15, Per Heldal wrote: > > Regardless of the listed arguments one may also question IETFs role in > > the definition of (any) ULA as there is no technical reason why such an > > address-block must be tagged 'special'. > > I'm going to disagree. Of course, for RFC 4193 there's no doubt that > an IANA-assigned fixed prefix is needed. But I think the argument is > much the same for any reasonable form of ULA-C prefix; we need them > to be universally identifiable as local prefixes that should only > be routed by an IGP. If you don't want that property, they don't > deserve a name containing "local" and should indeed be allocated > by registry policy. But then they are a different animal and need > a different name.
10 or 15 years ago I would agree. Then the RIRs were just being established and there was no ICANN/ASO through which the RIR-communities could set global policies for IANA. IETF was king wrt to policies in an era when the internet largely was made up of networks belonging to various government agencies. Both the net and the world of internet governance has changed a lot since. Today IETF is better off focusing on how things are supposed to work than trying to decide how they should be used. In recent years I've come across several network devices with functionality that would be useful, but couldn't be used because their properties needlessly were linked to the use of private addresses. That is based on rfc1918 which is only a BCP. With IPv6 we're imho going in the wrong direction and turning policies into technical standards. RFC 4193 is a standards-track document. Even policies defined through a governance body may form a base for default configurations in network devices, but I belive such policies are less likely to be implemented in silicon. I don't oppose the definition of ULA, or even ULA-C. To make sense they have to be globally assigned like you say, but that does not mean they have to be IETF standards. //per -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
