IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: For whom is IPv6? [was: Happy St Nicholas Day: Re-Launching the IPv6 ULA registry]

Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Sun, 13 December 2020 22:24 UTC

Return-Path: <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
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 079CB3A0B45 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 13 Dec 2020 14:24:39 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.001
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham 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 VZtW9YjUIHoW for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 13 Dec 2020 14:24:34 -0800 (PST)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (tuna.sandelman.ca [209.87.249.19]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3BC923A0B44 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Sun, 13 Dec 2020 14:24:33 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id E51FC3898C; Sun, 13 Dec 2020 17:27:03 -0500 (EST)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id OX6EdiHoyGvd; Sun, 13 Dec 2020 17:27:03 -0500 (EST)
Received: from sandelman.ca (obiwan.sandelman.ca [209.87.249.21]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 568673898B; Sun, 13 Dec 2020 17:27:03 -0500 (EST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 32B0377; Sun, 13 Dec 2020 17:24:32 -0500 (EST)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
To: Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com>
cc: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>, IPv6 List <ipv6@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: For whom is IPv6? [was: Happy St Nicholas Day: Re-Launching the IPv6 ULA registry]
In-Reply-To: <b263b703-403b-6af5-9ae9-09497ecedc76@si6networks.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> <47d1fbd9-8979-91af-240f-ec8c86f15e8d@gmail.com> <87h7ouoww4.fsf@ungleich.ch> <CAN-Dau06FTQr_c8C=cqgFGuPZ-KN2pbT-RmTHTEOkMZF0QWmNQ@mail.gmail.com> <b63e0c58-8e70-9c83-3f6e-6a503c20d974@gmail.com> <6983.1607632594@localhost> <b3bf02a6-f204-f392-dcb6-583d5558951f@gmail.com> <b263b703-403b-6af5-9ae9-09497ecedc76@si6networks.com>
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6+git; nmh 1.7+dev; GNU Emacs 26.1
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-sha512"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 2020 17:24:32 -0500
Message-ID: <5006.1607898272@localhost>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/cUxQa1GTdnrQ8vtqnt_Q26w17QA>
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: Sun, 13 Dec 2020 22:24:39 -0000

Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com> wrote:
    >>> There may be no connection via the *DFZ*.  You might never be able to
    >>> reach these networks from NZ.
    >>>
    >>> That doesn't mean there is no connection.  It could be a hundred 100m
    >>> 802.15.4 radios running on solar power.
    >>
    >> Right, that's an entirely different situation and I hope it will be a
    >> frequent one. We have several /3s spare. Should we dedicate a /3 to
    >> that class of usage, and figure out (with IANA and the RIRs) how to
    >> make such prefixes available for admin cost only, or even self-service
    >> free of charge along the lines Nico suggested?

    > Just trying to understand myself: Is the issue that the ULA space is
    > deemed to be not large enough?

No, it's that ULA space provides no diagnostics: no whois, no reverse DNS, no RPSL.

    > Or is the thing that they want GUAs that are free of the charges RIRs
    > normally charge for them?

Globally routable space is exactly what is not wanted.
Having it go dead due to BCP38-like filtering is desirable.

It lets us do things with IPv6 which where painful, annoying or just gross
with IPv4 RFC1918.

--
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>   . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting )
           Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email