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

[Mark Andrews <[e-mail]>]

In message <CAKD1Yr2nomEgPj4ec8kbEruphe=[e-mail]>, Lorenzo Colitti writes:
> On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 10:35 AM, Mark Andrews <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> > > How are they punished? And what will they do when they are punished? I
> > > guarantee that renumbering will not be the solution, NAT will be the
> > > solution.
> >
> > Both sites just generate a NEW ULA prefixes.  They can continue to
> > use the collision prefix until the heat death of the universe if
> > they wish to or they can migrate to the new prefix.  IPv6 is NOT
> > IPv4.  Running parallel prefixes is *standard* proceedure.  They
> > just need to talk to each other using the NEW prefixes which should
> > be no more complicated than pushing new address selection tables.
> >
> 
> No, sorry. One of the main reasons people are advocating ULAs here is
> "because we'll have stable space and will never have to renumber!!11". Once
> you buy into that mantra, you'll be hardcoding IP addresses into
> configuration again, exactly like we do in IPv4 today. And exactly like in
> IPv4 today, renumbering will be prohibitively expensive.
> 
> As for multiple ULA prefixes... again, I think you're ignoring the
> realities of corporate IT staffing, corporate IT systems, and vendor
> capabilities.

I already run multiple prefixes at home and have for years.  Vendors
*already* support multiple prefixes.  Corperate IP systems will be
supporting ULA1 + GUA1 (+ GUA2 + GUA3 for multi-homers).  ULA1 +
ULA2 + GUA1 (+ GUA2 + GUA3) is not a big streach.  Now as for
corporate IP staff you teach them what to do when teaching the how
to run IPv6 networks.

> I think it's obvious that the path of least resistance (and thus, the
> solution that most admins would choose) will be NAT/NPT. After all, if you
> want to use ULAs to talk to the outside world (And why wouldn't you, right?
> It's what we do in IPv4, right?), you have to do NAT or NPT anyway.

It's a matter of education.  Adding "How to deal with a ULA prefix
collisions" to this document would be a good first step.

-- 
Mark Andrews, ISC
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE: [phone]                 INTERNET: [e-mail]