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

[Fernando Gont <[e-mail]>]

Hi, Lorenzo,

On 6/12/20 21:42, Lorenzo Colitti wrote:
> Nico,
> 
> This seems a bit misguided for several reasons.
> 
> First, registries are supposed to be authoritative databases, but the 
> RFC specifies that ULA addresses are generated pseudo-randomly.

Strictly speaking, there exist registries that are not authoritative -- 
e.g., think of the registered ports in the port number registry.


> Therefore, if a pseudo-randomly allocated address conflicts with 
> something in the registry, the registry should be deemed incorrect.

Following the logic of the port number registry, if two organizations 
use the same prefix, the registry could simply note that.

That said, I'm not sure:

1) Whether folks would be compelled to register their blocks.

2) (Partly as a result of #1), the extent to which a registry would be 
of any use.


That aside, in a way the whole point of randomizing the ULA prefix is 
that results statistically unique. So, provided folks do follow the 
advice in the ULA spec (I for one have *not :-) in a number of 
occasions), there shouldn't be much of a need to actually register ULA 
prefixes... (if the prefixes are unique... who cares who uses what?)

Thanks,
-- 
Fernando Gont
SI6 Networks
e-mail: [e-mail]
PGP Fingerprint: 6666 31C6 D484 63B2 8FB1 E3C4 AE25 0D55 1D4E 7492