IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

Doug Barton <dougb@dougbarton.us> Wed, 28 May 2014 05:39 UTC

Return-Path: <dougb@dougbarton.us>
X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 67C561A0341 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 27 May 2014 22:39:46 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.653
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.653 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.651, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id t8x8ccyO21zs for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 27 May 2014 22:39:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dougbarton.us (dougbarton.us [IPv6:2607:f2f8:ab14::2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 801BC1A0330 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Tue, 27 May 2014 22:39:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.2.6] (unknown [99.146.30.218]) by dougbarton.us (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A17B122B1D for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Wed, 28 May 2014 05:39:41 +0000 (UTC)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=dougbarton.us; s=dougbarton.us; t=1401255581; bh=ba1xFTvryTf7cdclh+/oUj/M1vQBL96XDHYvWXaSMpU=; h=Date:From:To:Subject:References:In-Reply-To; b=V4kUldmXWFqCXvOCTwecyRfsxksLanoLwMrhyTa4VJnJzR6ARlwgGVNJNxwdGHLHy pfT1+uP9W7t+ijWJ4987c2EiAN74gqPAYYyacbLfstq9OnlGs5jqgbW41RRZ0OZspQ mfQ/OmcxfBfg/wUqP85316UhYdYnwUjSjCQUwZQg=
Message-ID: <5385769B.9000406@dougbarton.us>
Date: Tue, 27 May 2014 22:39:39 -0700
From: Doug Barton <dougb@dougbarton.us>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.5.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: v6ops@ietf.org
References: <8AE0F17B87264D4CAC7DE0AA6C406F453D8B6B9A@nkgeml506-mbx.china.huawei.com> <1401141423.52956.YahooMailNeo@web162206.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
In-Reply-To: <1401141423.52956.YahooMailNeo@web162206.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.7a1pre
OpenPGP: id=1A1ABC84
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/WBSHIBvucw6skxO3P5aR96e4NNg
Subject: Re: [v6ops] ULA draft revision #2 Regarding isolated networks
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: v6ops discussion list <v6ops.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/v6ops/>
List-Post: <mailto:v6ops@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 28 May 2014 05:39:46 -0000

On 05/26/2014 02:57 PM, Mark ZZZ Smith wrote:
> This paragraph seems to show a fundamental misunderstanding of IPv6's multi-addressing capabilities. IPv6 supports multiple concurrent addresses (from different prefixes), and can learn new ones or deprecate old ones over time. Attachment to a new network doesn't require renumbering, it requires propagating new prefixes for the hosts to use in addition to their existing ones. Primarily RFC6724 address selection will help the hosts choose the right addresses to use as source and destinations when they have multiple addresses.

Mark,

How does this help the medium-sized enterprise which has internal 
resources that need host names?

Doug

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email