RE: Stupid ULA discussion

Hi Brian,

> And to point out the existence of a suitable replacement for IPv4's 
> 10.0.0.0/8 et al, if they want a non-registered, non-unique, truly 
> non-routable address space that maps well to their current  RFC 1918 space.

> And that would be the IPv4-mapped IPv6 address space for RFC 1918.
> I.e. ::ffff:10.0.0.0, ::ffff:172.16.0.0 and ::ffff:192.168.0.0 (as /104, 
> /108, and /112 respectively.)

Please do not suggest anything remotely close to this. The v4 mapped v6 address 
space is for API compatibility purposes only (i.e. use AF_INET6 with 
v4 addresses). These addresses should never ever appear on the wire.

For more information see section 2.2 of RFC4942 and 
draft-itojun-v6ops-v4mapped-harmful-02.txt (expired draft - google it)

Cheers
Suresh

--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
ipv6@ietf.org
Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------