IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Non routable IPv6 registry proposal

Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com> Mon, 15 March 2021 18:54 UTC

Return-Path: <bob.hinden@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3D6883A1B01 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 15 Mar 2021 11:54:32 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.099
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 ZMQIbBtiN1f4 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 15 Mar 2021 11:54:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wm1-x32b.google.com (mail-wm1-x32b.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::32b]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CDB2C3A1AFE for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 15 Mar 2021 11:54:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wm1-x32b.google.com with SMTP id r10-20020a05600c35cab029010c946c95easo43904wmq.4 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 15 Mar 2021 11:54:30 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date:in-reply-to:cc:to :references; bh=iGv32+Zk9j5sPpgm08w8uGidG/RmZXo4GbqYNe48+hQ=; b=pPxKK+pkwMu85KcCsLwODB4GXaD5JvK8UhmxFnNgMWH6/jyF8QlHVg5jcGdgGXKoBR NSSXR6lO6n9xKsefR/PJa6ZuJhj6o423GIg3klssRK2/67z3hHmq74blgYjuexwym9xc 5gqtf84uNBrL3UHWXshUBhDNsgmNbjKJDVczFs4N9UJ6sywKhNXUz1CgDF8W34uP87ze Z5i9sfY/aNCAKS/zpBAEoV9vuGPtBNWpKWYn2P88ZO214H5eCauNoEvh+9y59e7sPlqg EZv+tvkDfDXnk/yMlzykown8j1TSJFVjuFJ8ZeBzTnoluOoeVDtJMOXQzHL+lTODptEI +AQg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date :in-reply-to:cc:to:references; bh=iGv32+Zk9j5sPpgm08w8uGidG/RmZXo4GbqYNe48+hQ=; b=CBekvY3nYDQM/p/CXXSucHjRVP65FjnEe402cfODrqcDik9utz6KwyY5umTfkEvVng +IugwzKSTs2jCCYCABO+AulpLzw+3v8NxZ0gfVgj32tP8HgRLx4FfpHazOpud2nhqY3L dBXPd3C229H8E3Rz/L4Mk4r/EQeVmux5HA7xrJIjAUZoMGR85JUECPmPshsZSfMrK4vm PL2fr1628XsCp7eqiKfm7PjvwHfBXJ1EWEG2uCz0XDq4KSGXZg4zSUd33RrBFd033GK7 TcxvggLetVhAWSCnHuP9VK0rGXTkRmFESRnm1uZx+GZ1yXUjyO40sAG3j9LdjCigNW8p ilRA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530/kEGfrfXWmP3P8N7D9aSkshJMGpjiTxdWSmh104y8KDDn8R0Q pzg2OXWOm2fmCG94RTqzWyc=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwYtuArY/TrguABSH4HvI2SrEXqw37MfPkFrKmjtCuXMePzndIsR67GLIlBzhC8upGjc8VETw==
X-Received: by 2002:a1c:bb89:: with SMTP id l131mr1066461wmf.47.1615834467405; Mon, 15 Mar 2021 11:54:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ?IPv6:2601:647:5a00:461:d438:e87f:b351:259b? ([2601:647:5a00:461:d438:e87f:b351:259b]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id w6sm20531476wrl.49.2021.03.15.11.54.25 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 15 Mar 2021 11:54:26 -0700 (PDT)
From: Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com>
Message-Id: <35B3977B-E1D4-471D-AC9D-5776E474262A@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_115059BA-8427-46AB-86B8-CC73A0F868B9"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha512"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.4 \(3445.104.17\))
Subject: Re: Non routable IPv6 registry proposal
Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2021 11:54:22 -0700
In-Reply-To: <4ebf878d-c5f4-1487-9ae6-c53e3f3d1c1d@network-heretics.com>
Cc: Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com>, Brian Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>, Nico Schottelius <nico.schottelius@ungleich.ch>, David Farmer <farmer@umn.edu>, IETF <ietf@ietf.org>
To: Keith Moore <moore@network-heretics.com>
References: <CAMm+LwjNiE0P7RAVqzKMypNbh3=9BeqiWn_hGv3E=zX7-YmSXQ@mail.gmail.com> <72F969A9-AF94-47B6-B48C-B3CD4D9A7C72@strayalpha.com> <7cc9e38c-5a00-ec59-a8c2-10503cc40d50@si6networks.com> <CB1A6DF0-8CDD-495D-9F7B-80BF72F08C1E@strayalpha.com> <53d7190a-3e1f-66b3-0574-8e8fbb3a7a5e@si6networks.com> <90718D2A-3483-45D2-A5FB-205659D4DCDB@cisco.com> <87h7li0z2t.fsf@line.ungleich.ch> <253e084c-6ced-7f94-c909-bd44f7c53529@network-heretics.com> <CAN-Dau2YCvCfWmPwGhF8q2c5fMDCbMhNBDA180x1o1Y9ZQga7Q@mail.gmail.com> <ae98f990-a063-70a2-5244-8aca0d19be44@gmail.com> <CAN-Dau3pV7y7g=QxGwipPUAQgf-TXE41MJGK47oUeSaNx5COng@mail.gmail.com> <0d364d72-44e3-27bc-fc15-c3c30da4522c@gmail.com> <CAN-Dau1+Pc658VY_oWJS+ooNLw8+Y59ma2nuY1jbzcecaO=fxg@mail.gmail.com> <87h7ldpuv0.fsf@ungleich.ch> <d0f2a06b-1d48-d43e-b962-5a695f154b73@gmail.com> <BC18C8B1-7D29-4EE1-A9EB-70B4218CE858@gmail.com> <4ebf878d-c5f4-1487-9ae6-c53e3f3d1c1d@network-heretics.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.104.17)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/bn904he1DMkT9901ULEjDEGiQAY>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2021 18:54:32 -0000

Keith,

> On Mar 15, 2021, at 10:38 AM, Keith Moore <moore@network-heretics.com> wrote:
> 
> On 3/15/21 1:28 PM, Bob Hinden wrote:
> 
>> I agree.   I have always thought that the biggest issue for ULA-C is who maintains the central registry.   It needs to be free or very low cost, and permanent.
> 
> I am guessing that the biggest issue is actually to prevent them from being advertised and routed in the public network.   Sure, in the near term, maybe everyone will filter route advertisements for ULA-C prefixes, but what about the long term?   Since they're globally unique and traceable to their owners, there's less technical justification for filtering them.

I think the biggest hurdle would be to get them advertised.  That would include running BGP with an ISP and advertising the prefix.  That usually costs money.   I suspect the sites that are capable of doing this (technically and financially) would just get an RIR prefix.

Bob

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email