Subject: RE: Draft on Globally Unique IPv6 Local Unicast Addresses

From: "Christian Huitema" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 13 May 2003 12:13:29 -0700

> While it's good simplify the architectural constructs, particularly
when
> it comes to the ambiguity introduced with SLs, and while I see this
> draft as addressing the disconnected network reasonably well, I'm
still
> left with the concern that what will really happen is that people will
> go and get a PI address in order to avoid renumbering and then end up
> NATing *that* because it won't be routable.

The only way to prevent that from happening is to define a form of
scoping. If the GUILUA addresses are supposed to be in a scope of their
own, then the hosts stacks can be instructed that they cannot be used as
a source address when communicating with a non-GUILUA destination, and
vice versa. If you wire that in enough hosts, then the NATing scenario
that you describe will become a deployment nightmare, and the networks
will end up using a different approach.

-- Christian Huitema

--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List
IPng Home Page:                      http://playground.sun.com/ipng
FTP archive:                      ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng
Direct all administrative requests to [email-masked]
--------------------------------------------------------------------

---

From: Eliot Lear <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 13 May 2003 14:52:23 -0700

Christian,

> scoping.

I disagree.  I think the only way to deal with the problem I describe is 
to deal with renumbering properly.  Now, where shall that work be done?

Eliot

---

From: Margaret Wasserman <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 13 May 2003 18:04:21 -0400

Hi Eliot,

If you understand how to deal with renumbering properly, it might
make sense to hold a BOF...

Margaret

---

From: Eliot Lear <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 08:23:41 -0700

> make sense to hold a BOF...

Honestly I'm not sure I do just yet.  I was hoping we could flush out 
the matter on this list.  For all I know, someone already has and I'm 
just behind the times.  See my note to Dave.

Eliot