Hi, Section 2.3 of draft-arifumi-6man-rfc3484-revise-01 says:
> 2.3. To change ULA address scope to site-local > > RFC 5220 Section 2.1.4, 2.2.2, and 2.2.3 describes address selection > problems related to ULA. These problems can be solved by changing > the scope of ULA to site-local. This change will also create a new problem, for sites that configure a VPN to another partner site using ULAs on both sites, so that ULA-to-ULA traffic can use the VPN. In this case ULA=global and longest match may well be the correct choice. If we change to ULA=site-local, then there must be a note that sites wishing to use ULAs for VPN communications will need to configure local 3484bis policy accordingly. (This is really the inverse of what is stated in RFC 5220.) Brian -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
