Re: [v6ops] I-D Action: draft-ietf-v6ops-ula-usage-recommendations-02.txt

[Sander Steffann <[e-mail]>]

Hi,

> Well, there have always been some people against the existence of ULAs,
> but we did reach rough consensus to define them, since other people
> see value in them, for reasons that have been aired many times.
> So writing words about the best way to use them if you want to use
> them seems right to me.

I think the document is a bit long, but as it describes all the pros/cons in different usage scenarios I think it is necessary to give a balanced view. I think this draft is going to be very useful for operators (many who are new to IPv6 and addicted to RFC1918 addresses so their first idea is ULA+NAT for the entire office) that are planning their IPv6 deployment and need to understand if/how to use ULA. And more importantly: how not to use it. That last bit might need some more emphasis. I think section 3.2.1 is a bit too positive (even though it mentions 'specific situations')

Cheers,
Sander