IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Happy St Nicholas Day: Re-Launching the IPv6 ULA registry

Philip Homburg <pch-ipv6-ietf-7@u-1.phicoh.com> Wed, 09 December 2020 20:31 UTC

Return-Path: <pch-b9D3CB0F5@u-1.phicoh.com>
X-Original-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 83A8B3A116F for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 9 Dec 2020 12:31:39 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.499
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.499 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, KHOP_HELO_FCRDNS=0.399, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=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 geOt3v4A8G59 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 9 Dec 2020 12:31:38 -0800 (PST)
Received: from stereo.hq.phicoh.net (stereo6-tun.hq.phicoh.net [IPv6:2001:888:1044:10:2a0:c9ff:fe9f:17a9]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9FAE23A1160 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Wed, 9 Dec 2020 12:31:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: from stereo.hq.phicoh.net (localhost [::ffff:127.0.0.1]) by stereo.hq.phicoh.net with esmtp (TLS version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305) (Smail #157) id m1kn67Y-0000EGC; Wed, 9 Dec 2020 21:31:32 +0100
Message-Id: <m1kn67Y-0000EGC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net>
To: ipv6@ietf.org
Subject: Re: Happy St Nicholas Day: Re-Launching the IPv6 ULA registry
From: Philip Homburg <pch-ipv6-ietf-7@u-1.phicoh.com>
Sender: pch-b9D3CB0F5@u-1.phicoh.com
References: <87r1o3deni.fsf@ungleich.ch> <CAKD1Yr3ptRjewThToEgERUOKwehTwdqNUAq14acc_nHLFqf3bg@mail.gmail.com> <87im9ds0z9.fsf@ungleich.ch> <fc637d64-a763-e5cf-fb93-002babe5f9ae@foobar.org> <87v9dcr37w.fsf@ungleich.ch> <CA+9kkMCb9fJQFJaP5ZaiwkQ2nRS7Fsn+q=C5OCPqdmMZRLSBKg@mail.gmail.com> <87sg8fp8ez.fsf@ungleich.ch> <m1kmyvz-00007rC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net> <fdaa0bad-a808-264a-e98b-9fa37ba198d6@gmail.com>
In-reply-to: Your message of "Thu, 10 Dec 2020 07:50:42 +1300 ." <fdaa0bad-a808-264a-e98b-9fa37ba198d6@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 09 Dec 2020 21:31:30 +0100
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/FSy5RNepCeglfQNRQow-mGFtGdk>
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "IPv6 Maintenance Working Group \(6man\)" <ipv6.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ipv6/>
List-Post: <mailto:ipv6@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 09 Dec 2020 20:31:40 -0000

> That's only true for address space that IANA has released to the
> RIRs.  That is not the case for fc00::/7, which remains under IETF
> control.

Yes, but it would be weird for the IETF to decide on an address registry
without involving the RIRs.

Of course, the current situation where there is no registry from ULA is
also perfectly fine.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email