On 9/28/11 14:57 CDT, Roland Bless wrote:
Hi David,

On 28.09.2011 20:24, David Farmer wrote:
Yes, OUI exhaustion isn't and shouldn't be a problem unless we make
it one.

My point was if you implement your proposal without doing a more
classic ULA-C also, you will create demand for OUIs from the
enterprise world just so they can get registered ULAs.  There are not
enough OUIs to satisfy that demand, and it would be a waste, too.

So if you do an ULA-M you need to also do ULA-C to prevent those that
would be happy with ULA-C from consuming vast numbers of OUIs only
for the purpose of obtaining ULA.

I see your point now and agree. My intent was not to replace ULA-Cs,
but to propose something that fits more the intended use cases.

I don't think you actually need to reinvent that wheel, draft-hain-ipv6-ulac-02 seems reasonable to me. When we are inventing ULA-M, or what ever it it call, based on OUIs, we just need to realize that we need to push the other wheel out the door too.

Maybe we can start with new names;

ULA-S (Self-assigned) - Statistically unique prefix with local algorithmic assignment at no cost, you assign a prefix yourself. ULA-R (Registered) - Unique Prefix registered to an Organizations through the RIRs, a prefix is assigned to you. ULA-M (Manufactured) - Unique Prefix manufactured into a device, a prefix comes with your device.

ULA-S is the current RFC 4193, ULA-R could be based on draft-hain-ipv6-ulac-02, ULA-M is based on OUIs and OLAs as you describe.


--
===============================================
David Farmer               Email:far...@umn.edu
Networking & Telecommunication Services
Office of Information Technology
University of Minnesota 
2218 University Ave SE      Phone: 612-626-0815
Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029   Cell: 612-812-9952
===============================================
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
ipv6@ietf.org
Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply via email to