Re: [v6ops] ULA draft revision #2 Regarding isolated networks

[Randy Bush <[e-mail]>]

>> If those ULAs happen to clash, you have to renumber at least one of
>> them.
> 
> or use NAT.  I'm not saying this in order to throw fuel on an existing
> fire, but simply because this is the reality for many organisations in
> the ipv4 world, and I see little reason why it will change for ipv6.
> The IETF can make recommendations about whether it thinks this is a
> good idea or not, but it is not productive to pretend that the
> elephant isn't in the room.

so, bottom line here is, in its inimitable fashion, the ietf will push
ULA and get NAT.  what a win!

randy