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

[Nick Hilliard <[e-mail]>]

On 27/05/2014 14:59, Ted Lemon wrote:
> Right, the point is that if we provide advice on how to set up ULA
> networks so that future transitions of this sort do not require NAT,
> that's worth doing. 

sounds good to me.

> Actually, for the enterprise scenario, I think the
> advice should just be "get a GUA, use it like a ULA" because that
> excludes the possibility of a future clash when two behemoths merge.
> But it makes source address selection harder.   And there was a document
> a while back about informal ULA registries, IIRC, which could also
> represent a good mitigation strategy if it were to happen (but I think
> that's outside our scope of work).

register or do not register.  there is no "informal".

Nick