Re: [v6ops] draft-ietf-v6ops-ula-usage-recommendations - work or abandon?

[Owen DeLong <[e-mail]>]

+1 to everything Lorenzo says below.

> On Nov 2, 2015, at 11:55 PM, Lorenzo Colitti <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> My recollection is that we never got around to publishing this document because we never managed to agree on what to say in the recommendations. I think that because the working group does not actually have consensus on what ULAs should be used for. 
> 
> Generalizing and handwaving a bit, I think that the major disagreement is between:
> Some proponents of ULAs are suggesting that ULAs (are being | can be | should be) used in similar ways to RFC 1918, including using them behind NPT66 or in the absence of global addresses, and say that the document should list those as use cases.
> A fair number of WG members are vehemently opposed to such uses, and say that WG documents should explicitly call out such practices as harmful. We heard a few of those members at the mike yesterday during the discussion of the design choices draft.
> For as long as that disagreement exists, it will be hard to make a recommendation, which is likely to make it hard to get consensus on this draft. We can go through that disagreement again, but I don't personally think the outcome will be any different from the one we had last time around.
> 
> I happen to be in camp #2 and would be happy to support this draft if it said that ULA-only deployments, NPT66 and NAT66 are harmful and should be avoided. But I'm sure a fair number of people disagree with me.
> 
> On Tue, Nov 3, 2015 at 9:49 AM, Howard, Lee <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
> I see interest from Victor Kuarsingh, David Farmer, Alexandre Petrescu, and
> Brian Carpenter. Can I ask each of you to do a review of the current
> document, and send comments to the mailing list?  That will give the
> authors
> and the WG something to work from.
> 
> Following that, we can discuss whether we need additional discussion at a
> meeting, or WGLC.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Lee
> 
> 
> On 11/3/15, 9:20 AM, "Victor Kuarsingh" <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
> 
> >WG,
> >
> >My input is that we should continue this work.  Given ULAs are already
> >in use, having a document which outlines those use cases is, in my mind,
> >operationally beneficial.
> >
> >Perhaps we should be more clear that we would not be recommending the
> >use of ULAs, but keep to a unbiased document which outlines how they
> >have been used (just a use case discussion).  We can also include
> >objective technical points as to the pros/cons related to each use case.
> >
> >It was also noted in another email (based on WG v6ops discussion
> >yesterday), that one such valid example was Cable Modem management IPs
> >assigned ULA based addressing.  This is a valid technical use case.
> >
> >I am willing to help if required on this document.
> >
> >regards,
> >
> >Victor K
> >
> >On 2015-11-02 6:17 PM, Howard, Lee wrote:
> >> This document hasn¹t had any revisions or discussion in a while.
> >> Is there anyone interested in working on it?
> >>
> >> If we do not hear any interest, we will abandon this draft.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Lee
> >>
> >>
> >> ________________________________
> >>
> >> This E-mail and any of its attachments may contain Time Warner Cable
> >>proprietary information, which is privileged, confidential, or subject
> >>to copyright belonging to Time Warner Cable. This E-mail is intended
> >>solely for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed.
> >>If you are not the intended recipient of this E-mail, you are hereby
> >>notified that any dissemination, distribution, copying, or action taken
> >>in relation to the contents of and attachments to this E-mail is
> >>strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this
> >>E-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and permanently
> >>delete the original and any copy of this E-mail and any printout.
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> v6ops mailing list
> >> [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
> >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops>
> >
> 
> 
> ________________________________
> 
> This E-mail and any of its attachments may contain Time Warner Cable proprietary information, which is privileged, confidential, or subject to copyright belonging to Time Warner Cable. This E-mail is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient of this E-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, copying, or action taken in relation to the contents of and attachments to this E-mail is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this E-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and permanently delete the original and any copy of this E-mail and any printout.
> _______________________________________________
> v6ops mailing list
> [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops>
> 
> _______________________________________________
> v6ops mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops