Re: [homenet] Let's make in-home ULA presence a MUST !?

Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com> Thu, 16 October 2014 17:37 UTC

Return-Path: <mellon@fugue.com>
X-Original-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ABB8B1A19EF for <homenet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 16 Oct 2014 10:37:17 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.917
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.917 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, PLING_QUERY=0.994, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id jfedZu7AsPr2 for <homenet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 16 Oct 2014 10:37:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from toccata.fugue.com (toccata.fugue.com [204.152.186.142]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A9EF1A0636 for <homenet@ietf.org>; Thu, 16 Oct 2014 10:37:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.63] (c-71-201-198-58.hsd1.il.comcast.net [71.201.198.58]) by toccata.fugue.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8BEF9238045C; Thu, 16 Oct 2014 13:37:14 -0400 (EDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\))
From: Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com>
In-Reply-To: <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E61130EA3B9A@GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com>
Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2014 12:37:10 -0500
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <1AA5DBBD-C3C5-4AFD-A043-6A69AE7FBDB9@fugue.com>
References: <CAAedzxp1R-C5E9RJVMVLRJxPc0w4zooPtqnvWK9eggpZu4=xtg@mail.gmail.com> <C7F3DE60-F596-4BAD-9C28-74006966E5B9@fugue.com> <20141014142746.GX31092@Space.Net> <69B1F2CB-88C6-4211-83F3-11C8A3E7BFD2@fugue.com> <20141014145930.GY31092@Space.Net> <m1Xe3jL-0000I7C@stereo.hq.phicoh.net> <20141014154111.GZ31092@Space.Net> <C6760B68-C913-4B22-98E6-6D29A66F80D9@fugue.com> <20141015150422.GW31092@Space.Net> <4E2E154E-D231-4E79-860A-56948A13CDD4@fugue.com> <20141015154841.GY31092@Space.Net> <CBC8A3D9-9EBD-47FF-B066-247898FF2000@fugue.com> <543EA248.2080700@mtcc.com> <CB50B30B-DC36-4354-96B7-19AE415BD03F@fugue.com> <543EBE40.3030201@mtcc.com> <BA5ABBFA-9D13-4975-A96C-530FE958322A@fugue.com> <543ED2A7.3090409@mtcc.com> <1569644A-50C4-47B6-908E-262BC62BCD14@fugue.com> <543EFBF1.6040101@mtcc.com> <457D177C-232E-4590-A9ED-80048140157F@fugue.com> <CAKD1Yr1kix0HxWsC4n7ta4EG-6YhMMdYCTnFFXGb2ATQBbkMHA@mail.gmail.com> <DCB62D43-DFD3-4985-8FAA-896CEA3BD342@fugue.com> <BE969E9B-99C0-415C-804F -80149C416EA8@fugue.com> <CAKD1Yr3kJQetKzgYyZ1vpxKT31=wiNavxTM+WoUTg2gP5Dx4LQ@mail.gmail.com> <94C19398-AC5A-416F-8C3E-EA6B1750C22C@fugue.com> <CAKD1Yr1rpFeZuy=nXFSj+dpa749RhJJ2j9+U=cmFq_4cCsC_4g@mail.gmail.com> <4D6F2B13-D63E-4FEE-A136-B510126CC1C9@fugue.com> <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E61130EA3B9A@GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com>
To: "STARK, BARBARA H" <bs7652@att.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.6)
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/homenet/Hu1yGYZKTV1uWm3ijWsNTkFMcH4
Cc: "homenet@ietf.org" <homenet@ietf.org>, Michael Thomas <mike@mtcc.com>, Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@google.com>
Subject: Re: [homenet] Let's make in-home ULA presence a MUST !?
X-BeenThere: homenet@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: <homenet.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/homenet>, <mailto:homenet-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/homenet/>
List-Post: <mailto:homenet@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:homenet-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet>, <mailto:homenet-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2014 17:37:17 -0000

On Oct 16, 2014, at 11:39 AM, STARK, BARBARA H <bs7652@att.com> wrote:
> I think support for receiving more specific routes in RA messages (RFC 4191) would be easier to get hosts to implement than DHCPv6.

This wouldn't help, because there's nothing to differentiate the GUA from the ULA.

> In any case, I think there needs to be a solution that *always* works in homenet hosts.

As I mentioned earlier, the downside to not doing this is that if a site gets flash-renumbered, connections on the local network that might not have broken if a ULA were used will break.   This is a fairly mild problem.   Additionally, we talked about advertising ULAs in DNS on the local network, and GUAs externally, so even devices that don't do DHCPv6 would benefit from this.