Re: [v6ops] Thoughts on draft-byrne-v6ops-clatip-01

[Owen DeLong <[e-mail]>]

On Apr 30, 2014, at 10:30 PM, joel jaeggli <[e-mail]> wrote:

> On 4/30/14, 7:55 PM, Lorenzo Colitti wrote:
>> On Thu, May 1, 2014 at 8:24 AM, Fred Baker (fred) <[e-mail]
>> <mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
>> 
>>   Ask me someday what thoughts go through my mind about applications
>>   making inferences from network layer addresses.
>> 
>> 
>> The wording in RFC 3927 is much stronger. For example, it states
>> multiple times that packets sourced from 169.254/16 MUST NOT be
>> forwarded, and that they MUST NOT ever be sent to any router for
>> forwarding. I think it's perfectly reasonable for an app (or even an
>> OS!) to assume that such addresses have no connectivity.
>> 
>> 
>>   Hey, 192.168.0.0/16 <http://192.168.0.0/16>is for networks that
>>   don’t connect to the Internet. You want proof? From RFC 1918, the
>>   motivation is
>> 
>>      With the proliferation of TCP/IP technology worldwide, including
>>      outside the Internet itself, an increasing number of non-connected
>>      enterprises use this technology and its addressing capabilities for
>>      sole intra-enterprise communications, without any intention to ever
>>      directly connect to other enterprises or the Internet itself.
>> 
>> 
>> Funny, that's what the proponents of ULA-only networks say too - "no,
>> this network will NEVER connect to the Internet, ever!!11" I suspect
>> they do so because they know that saying "we want to use NAT to connect
>> this network to the Internet like we do in IPv4" is going to result in
>> strong opinions and removal of support for the use case. But that's
>> off-topic here.
> 
> site-local unicast in ipv6  and rfc 1918 are relatively contemporaneous
> ideas...
> 
> I don't thing the pressures that produce such solutions are particularly
> new in fact it's pretty easy to assert that they co-evolved.

Yes, but unlike RFC-1918, we came to our senses and deprecated site-local.

ULA came later as a result of pressure from people who loved their NAT. Sad, really, that the problem was not addressed through education instead of better RIR policies for global unicast.

Owen