Re: [v6ops] draft-ietf-v6ops-enterprise-incremental-ipv6 WGLC

[Martin Millnert <[e-mail]>]

On 6 aug 2013, at 05:41, Lorenzo Colitti <[e-mail]> wrote:

> In that case, then that host can use any address that's globally unique, including global unicast or ULA. Global addresses have the advantage that they are unambiguously globally unique, whereas ULA addresses are only probabilistically unique. This means that if you have enough ULA to cause a collision then you will have problems, and if someone misconfigures their machines with the ULA prefix that you picked, then you're sort of SOL. On the other hand, ULA has an advantage over PI addresses because the latter may need to be renumbered if you change ISPs.
> 
> There's also the point that when people say "will never talk to the outside world", that's more often than not an oversimplification. :-)
> 
> Since these points are pretty subtle, they should be carefully worded. I think the right place for that is in the ULA usage document. Why not simply punt to that document?

Enterprises WILL configure addresses without using RIR-coordinated GUA, so just a summary of ULA and instead references to other RFCs, such as 4193 and mentioned drafts, is in order in this document IMO. 

/M