[v6ops] Discussion of Unique Local Address announcement in routing

"Brzozowski, John" <John_Brzozowski@Cable.Comcast.com> Tue, 30 July 2013 11:57 UTC

Return-Path: <john_brzozowski@cable.comcast.com>
X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D1F6E21F9943 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 30 Jul 2013 04:57:26 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -103.429
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.429 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.802, BAYES_00=-2.599, HOST_EQ_MODEMCABLE=1.368, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id HFdQOLJGw+VX for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 30 Jul 2013 04:57:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from cable.comcast.com (copdcavout01.cable.comcast.com []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B01C721F8DE3 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Tue, 30 Jul 2013 04:57:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ([]) by copdcavout01.cable.comcast.com with ESMTP id C7WM3M1.85258588; Tue, 30 Jul 2013 05:55:53 -0600
Received: from PACDCEXMB01.cable.comcast.com ([]) by PACDCEXHUB02.cable.comcast.com ([fe80::492e:3fa1:c2ad:e04e%13]) with mapi id 14.02.0318.001; Tue, 30 Jul 2013 07:57:07 -0400
From: "Brzozowski, John" <John_Brzozowski@Cable.Comcast.com>
To: v6ops <v6ops@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: Discussion of Unique Local Address announcement in routing
Thread-Index: AQHOjRvq1k7HQPYCMEalFZimxubx/Q==
Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2013 11:57:07 +0000
Message-ID: <BD87928F6BFAEF4EBEB883E1C4F587723B95F7D5@PACDCEXMB01.cable.comcast.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/
x-originating-ip: []
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <C934F6AA7500DD4D876261B979DA2FA0@cable.comcast.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: [v6ops] Discussion of Unique Local Address announcement in routing
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: Tue, 30 Jul 2013 11:57:27 -0000

Thanks George for sharing data on this topic, some questions and comments.

Do you have trend data for ULA use as IPv6 deployment has increased over

Also from a Comcast point of view the ULA use you are seeing is strictly
retailed based, meaning there are no routers that Comcast provides
software for or manages that supports ULA at this time.  Our internal
requirements and the Cablelabs eRouter/HIPnet work we are doing also does
not specify the use of ULA at this time.

I find this data interesting in part because there was some testing
recently done that indicates misbehaviors in specific scenarios where ULAs
are enabled along side GUAs.  This is of particular interest to us in part
because we feel the use you are seeing may adversely impact our customer's
experience.  The attempt to use ULAs to connect the Internet from a home
is problematic.

Thanks again,