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

Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Tue, 14 October 2014 15:29 UTC

Return-Path: <mcr@sandelman.ca>
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 0F00F1A8932 for <homenet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 14 Oct 2014 08:29:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.683
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.683 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, PLING_QUERY=0.994, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.786, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_TVD_MIME_NO_HEADERS=0.01] autolearn=ham
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 nWK46n3X9f0b for <homenet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 14 Oct 2014 08:29:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (tuna.sandelman.ca [209.87.249.19]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 961581A8946 for <homenet@ietf.org>; Tue, 14 Oct 2014 08:29:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sandelman.ca (obiwan.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:2::247]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id F2D0E203AB; Tue, 14 Oct 2014 11:29:49 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by sandelman.ca (Postfix, from userid 179) id 039F963B40; Tue, 14 Oct 2014 11:29:22 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from sandelman.ca (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF91363AD5; Tue, 14 Oct 2014 11:29:22 -0400 (EDT)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
To: Pierre Pfister <pierre.pfister@darou.fr>
In-Reply-To: <72CC13D1-7E7A-4421-B23E-16D8FFAEEB58@darou.fr>
References: <72CC13D1-7E7A-4421-B23E-16D8FFAEEB58@darou.fr>
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.2; nmh 1.3-dev; GNU Emacs 23.4.1
X-Face: $\n1pF)h^`}$H>Hk{L"x@)JS7<%Az}5RyS@k9X%29-lHB$Ti.V>2bi.~ehC0; <'$9xN5Ub# z!G,p`nR&p7Fz@^UXIn156S8.~^@MJ*mMsD7=QFeq%AL4m<nPbLgmtKK-5dC@#:k
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2014 11:29:22 -0400
Message-ID: <5620.1413300562@sandelman.ca>
Sender: mcr@sandelman.ca
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/homenet/lKZKaB1J1di8BudnXEULh7zpf3c
Cc: HOMENET Working Group <homenet@ietf.org>
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: Tue, 14 Oct 2014 15:29:28 -0000

Pierre Pfister <pierre.pfister@darou.fr> wrote:
    > The architecture document states the following: - A home network
    > running IPv6 should deploy ULAs alongside its globally unique
    > prefix(es) to allow stable communication between devices [...]

Doesn't RFC7084 (6204) already say this?

--
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>ca>, Sandelman Software Works
 -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-