Re: [v6ops] Scope of Unique Local IPv6 Unicast Addresses (Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-gont-6man-ipv6-ula-scope-00.txt)

Ted Lemon <> Sun, 14 February 2021 22:38 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 968863A0CF9 for <>; Sun, 14 Feb 2021 14:38:35 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.002
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.002 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id t8Q33Af-mgdh for <>; Sun, 14 Feb 2021 14:38:33 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::72f]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 238A63A0D21 for <>; Sun, 14 Feb 2021 14:38:33 -0800 (PST)
Received: by with SMTP id x14so4982955qkm.2 for <>; Sun, 14 Feb 2021 14:38:33 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20150623; h=from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date:in-reply-to:cc:to :references; bh=MkrNytNOys7i9i8AfbghNZ9HJqBEhzR0HcLpl1UhVPs=; b=JQ9FMzm2OzZM6GhLY8gJa/K7m3neB4XzFpLS36mIMOKbSH0OD//GohOwEu+CjZ01D9 rWg8gNmfpsJnVHL4GC/r5xhVBY9szGU1PDpWtnnvHDe4HCRK3Lc7d1R9W4orrMKiVtpQ HYxDLvDE/PuTFUp0wpJa5lzKCIshWbJJcc877aPuMUUb35/hPxNx1MPeTcbc+eObCz+1 qqx9nRr0dArY7XikyIjyhAMBHPhnvMkrhwoTfBH2R6gCFYtwAIoOlsMD++/Tg4MxKGAG qv42G5ENDpaWm3a3jNjcAvplciEZekSG8kjHNWg8HvC8Bbm3yxSeug295toGY0t/Anpq ErXg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date :in-reply-to:cc:to:references; bh=MkrNytNOys7i9i8AfbghNZ9HJqBEhzR0HcLpl1UhVPs=; b=R2+0gZWQeBzVcgUh8oUZ+DIuvcVo0peHlfI4BX3euYn/cQIWqGXItMOgLQZwOVgboG blyJOn2X/no6FFEdXzzRsMZNEg60xtE5DFTfSDCaSOJozqboPlmu2x0Ebp0SqQidaxaK jnSh9woPDtZwXZO07dRxmq2ggCBg0pZ+bm/N1NjYc20U2NdN02XIZ1MKNV9+ar0o7V8g JnFabQqyJ4hrcA+Tdy2uZkwtqbbiUgmvRhcB9Pqifq6waGx3AXL4NXTzEXM9Jv6VX9e7 aNqSq/3YPICQ5J4jNKApDU0AWbO5bT5vzg616nFlwAV0ZQab8Z26A7L3iI9jx90IXGBw DmqQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531hQOj4oAW5KKNg29b9HkSYjvSitsvGRuG94IbBp/J0aDCXWmGc JfzYty3GzkTSGS/vmimIStjv+A==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzSvltwjKBmKdCPDVAX+E7g/nwUiZtlRMFRnnYfu9/wkWVmLXRVYPigghj+B6X2atxPe+KstA==
X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:984:: with SMTP id x4mr12627545qkx.249.1613342312097; Sun, 14 Feb 2021 14:38:32 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) by with ESMTPSA id s136sm10704453qka.106.2021. (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sun, 14 Feb 2021 14:38:31 -0800 (PST)
From: Ted Lemon <>
Message-Id: <>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_F1374E1C-9474-453D-820A-EFF5469D6919"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 14.0 \(3654.\))
Date: Sun, 14 Feb 2021 17:38:30 -0500
In-Reply-To: <>
Cc: Brian E Carpenter <>, Fernando Gont <>, IPv6 Operations <>, "" <>
To: David Farmer <>
References: <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3654.
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] Scope of Unique Local IPv6 Unicast Addresses (Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-gont-6man-ipv6-ula-scope-00.txt)
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: v6ops discussion list <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 14 Feb 2021 22:38:36 -0000

On Feb 14, 2021, at 4:54 PM, David Farmer <> wrote:
> So when I read "uniquely identifying interfaces anywhere on the Internet", that suggests to me the entirety of the Internet, basically anywhere and everywhere, whether or not I can actually successfully get packets there or not.  I think that statement needs to be qualified or limited by reachability in some way. It doesn't need to specifically mention local-use, but I think it clarifies the issue.  The fact that someone else on the other side of the planet or even across the street is using the same ULA prefixes as me doesn't really matter because I can't get packets there, but that isn't that what that statement says.

The problem is, then you have to say what “local” means, and it doesn’t mean anything specific. And, specifically, scope right now can be used as a definitional meaning. If you add “site scope,” it doesn’t work, because it’s no longer definitional—it’s operational. Trying to do the same thing with ULA will have the same outcome.