Dan Purgert writes:
> Nicholas Geovanis wrote:
>> On Thu, Apr 18, 2019 at 7:57 AM Michael Stone wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> No, the ULA is the IPv6 equivalent of RFC1918 space--you can use it
>>> internally without central registration by choosing a subnet from
>>> fd00::/8. The space is so much larger th
On Thu, Apr 18, 2019, 8:29 AM Michael Stone wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 18, 2019 at 08:12:04AM -0500, Nicholas Geovanis wrote:
> >But isn't it irrelevant whether they pick the same prefix or not? Routers
> that
> >respect ULA and RFC1918 shouldn't route any traffic destined to them off
> the
> >logical
Le 18/04/2019 à 14:52, Michael Stone a écrit :
On Wed, Apr 17, 2019 at 09:37:36PM +0200, Pascal Hambourg wrote:
A properly generated IPv6 ULA (Unique Local Address) prefix is
unlikely to have collisions.
A randomly selected subnet from 10/8 is also *unlikely* to have
collisions.
The proba
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Nicholas Geovanis wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 18, 2019 at 7:57 AM Michael Stone wrote:
>
>>
>> No, the ULA is the IPv6 equivalent of RFC1918 space--you can use it
>> internally without central registration by choosing a subnet from
>> fd00::/8. The space i
On Thu, Apr 18, 2019 at 08:12:04AM -0500, Nicholas Geovanis wrote:
But isn't it irrelevant whether they pick the same prefix or not? Routers that
respect ULA and RFC1918 shouldn't route any traffic destined to them off the
logical subnet. Right?
If it didn't matter, people wouldn't keep looking
On Thu, Apr 18, 2019 at 7:57 AM Michael Stone wrote:
>
> No, the ULA is the IPv6 equivalent of RFC1918 space--you can use it
> internally without central registration by choosing a subnet from
> fd00::/8. The space is so much larger that it's much less likely that
> two sites would pick the same
On Wed, Apr 17, 2019 at 08:06:05PM -, Curt wrote:
On 2019-04-17, Pascal Hambourg wrote:
Le 17/04/2019 à 18:42, Michael Stone a écrit :
On Wed, Apr 17, 2019 at 12:38:11PM -0400, Celejar wrote:
On Wed, 17 Apr 2019 12:10:56 -0400 Michael Stone
wrote:
On Wed, Apr 17, 2019 at 11:57:43AM -04
On Wed, Apr 17, 2019 at 09:37:36PM +0200, Pascal Hambourg wrote:
Le 17/04/2019 à 18:42, Michael Stone a écrit :
On Wed, Apr 17, 2019 at 12:38:11PM -0400, Celejar wrote:
On Wed, 17 Apr 2019 12:10:56 -0400 Michael Stone
wrote:
On Wed, Apr 17, 2019 at 11:57:43AM -0400, Celejar wrote:
I was ra
On 2019-04-17, Pascal Hambourg wrote:
> Le 17/04/2019 à 18:42, Michael Stone a écrit :
>> On Wed, Apr 17, 2019 at 12:38:11PM -0400, Celejar wrote:
>>> On Wed, 17 Apr 2019 12:10:56 -0400 Michael Stone
>>> wrote:
>>>
On Wed, Apr 17, 2019 at 11:57:43AM -0400, Celejar wrote:
>I was rather
Le 17/04/2019 à 18:42, Michael Stone a écrit :
On Wed, Apr 17, 2019 at 12:38:11PM -0400, Celejar wrote:
On Wed, 17 Apr 2019 12:10:56 -0400 Michael Stone
wrote:
On Wed, Apr 17, 2019 at 11:57:43AM -0400, Celejar wrote:
>I was rather shocked to see that there was no definitive solution to
>avoi
10 matches
Mail list logo
