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

Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl> Wed, 15 October 2014 16:45 UTC

Return-Path: <sander@steffann.nl>
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 E31F31A8A95 for <homenet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 15 Oct 2014 09:45:39 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 1.088
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.088 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HELO_EQ_NL=0.55, HOST_EQ_NL=1.545, PLING_QUERY=0.994, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 eh_JzEXfwdSg for <homenet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 15 Oct 2014 09:45:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.sintact.nl (mail.sintact.nl [83.247.10.6]) (using TLSv1.1 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EFBBB1A8A79 for <homenet@ietf.org>; Wed, 15 Oct 2014 09:45:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.sintact.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id BDC8E4A; Wed, 15 Oct 2014 18:45:01 +0200 (CEST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=steffann.nl; h= x-mailer:references:message-id:content-transfer-encoding:date :date:in-reply-to:from:from:subject:subject:mime-version :content-type:content-type:received:received; s=mail; t= 1413391500; bh=kUwGxUUBiG5Kd7b+t/Ty2lWWWfvv+ZQMj9MicRIYQdI=; b=m 7O0s93mpWgG5gmyao/eQe2ydu61TSos2LK9e8U61CA9LQrVffm10C3HWWRPgYhet HhAAm4XGfhC0P8R2PJtmssjRVnfYfm+Wsqt+cV/VRp7CzF0PnfGlrvhROmoBCpB3 sVtfwh1jT/3ZC5KaQF0q6ga3bL8OHLM7zXwgAVckQ4=
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at mail.sintact.nl
Received: from mail.sintact.nl ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.sintact.nl [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id jGSDU-yniU-N; Wed, 15 Oct 2014 18:45:00 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [IPv6:2a00:8640:1::a948:e9d0:959f:2316] (unknown [IPv6:2a00:8640:1:0:a948:e9d0:959f:2316]) by mail.sintact.nl (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E923749; Wed, 15 Oct 2014 18:44:59 +0200 (CEST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.0 \(1990.1\))
From: Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl>
In-Reply-To: <CBC8A3D9-9EBD-47FF-B066-247898FF2000@fugue.com>
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2014 18:44:59 +0200
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <A341D59C-6BEA-4677-B604-08FEDE20A38F@steffann.nl>
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>
To: Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1990.1)
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/homenet/SwukckLmLMPLWVb_IC6oWrnvoyQ
Cc: HOMENET Working Group <homenet@ietf.org>, Philip Homburg <PC.Homburg-3@pub.phicoh.com>, =?utf-8?Q?Gert_D=C3=B6ring?= <gert@space.net>
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: Wed, 15 Oct 2014 16:45:40 -0000

Hi Ted,

> My point was that homenets should have ULAs, and should not use GUAs for local communication, because GUAs can be flash renumbered, and the use of them on the local wire has the potential to cause disruptions on the local wire that could be prevented by using ULAs.   And that there is no real downside to having ULAs on the local network.

I am starting to agree.

I think we should see if we can come up with a good way to manage the ULAs when splitting/merging/etc networks though. If we can't find something good for that then the solution might be worse than the original problem.

Cheers,
Sander