Re: [v6ops] draft-moreiras-v6ops-rfc3849bis-00

["Antonio M. Moreiras" <[e-mail]>]

On 12/08/13 19:07, Mark Andrews wrote:
> In message <[e-mail]>, Owen DeLong writes:
>>
>> On Aug 11, 2013, at 16:41 , Antonio M. Moreiras <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>
>>> On 11/08/13 19:29, Owen DeLong wrote:
>>>> I support the idea. It might be worth also asking for a ULA Doc slice at the same time.
>>>> I think a /48 is probably sufficient for most ULA examples.
>>>>
>>>> But I think it would be good to be able to write up ULA examples and training that use
>>>> actual ULA prefixes intended for documentation.
>>>
>>> I agree. An organization could generate an ULA prefix specifically to
>>> use in a course, or document. But it could be copied and used in
>>> production environments. This would break the "global uniqueness", and
>>> could lead to other problems. It would be nice to have a specific ULA
>>> documentation prefix.
>>>
>>> I would suggest a prefix with the L bit cleared, easy to remember, and
>>> maybe slightly shorter than /48. For example FC00:0:D0C0::/44.
>>>
>>> []s
>>> Moreiras.
>>
>> That would certainly be an acceptable solution as far as I am concerned.
> 
> So you would use a Centrally Assigned ULA to document Locally Assigned ULAs?
> What are you smoking today?  The is a BIG NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!

Why not? The use cases for Locally Assigned ULAs, and Centrally Assigned
ULA are the same. Asking IANA to assign an ULA prefix to a specific use
(documentation) would not be, by definition, a central assignment?

>> Owen