Re: [v6ops] Discussion of draft-ietf-v6ops-ula-usage-recommendations

[Mark Andrews <[e-mail]>]

In message <[e-mail]>, Alexandru Petrescu writes:
> 
> 
> Le 21/07/2015 16:53, Brian E Carpenter a crit :
> > On 22/07/2015 02:18, Alexandru Petrescu wrote:
> >> 1. Brian suggested to recommend that globals should be there on
> >> the machines having ULAs as well, if I understand correctly.
> >>
> >> But I think so only on some Hosts, mainly the Hosts of end users.
> >
> > All hosts that need external communication.
> 
> I agree, all hosts that need external communication.
> 
> 
> >> 2. the ULA RFC suggests a ULA prefix can be generated out of a MAC
> >> address.  That sixxs implementation does it.  Except it takes it
> >> too serious: it does not accept a MAC address which is not a real
> >> MAC address - in that oui.txt.  And random MAC addresses (for
> >> privacy) certainly are not in that oui.txt.
> >>
> >> I think this is an undesirable situation to be in: unable to
> >> generate ULAs because the only tool out there (sixxs) can't refuses
> >> a copy paste a MAC address from the widely used windows 7 laptops.
> >
> > That isn't a standards issue, but I agree that operationally, there
> > needs to be a viable way for anyone to generate a random number. Wait
> > a minute, that doesn't seem hard.
> 
> It's easily done centrally, but in a distributed manner it's harder -
> how am I sure the network I connect to has ULAs generated such that they
> dont clash with mine?

*YOU* generate you ULA properly.
 
> >> I am not sure what the problem is, but it's very good to have a
> >> very easy way to generate ULAs.
> >>
> >> 3. in an enterprise deployment there was a problem of ULAs deployed
> >> in a intra-network and another ULA space in another intra-network,
> >> of the same enterprise.  So we wanted to make sure two things: the
> >> two ULA spaces are distinct, or otherwise make sure the gateway
> >> router does not route between the two intranets' ULAs (but yes,
> >> route between their respective GUAs).
> >
> > Why not? ULA to ULA routing on a private link might be desired (e.g.
> > after two networks merge without renumbering). From a routing PoV
> > there is nothing special about a ULA prefix; we just need to
> > configure carefully where it is routed and where it is not routed.
> 
> Yes, private routing should be ok, but only if these ULAs are unique.
> If people on different networks use different generation methods then
> it's dubious to be sure of the uniqueness.  Maybe I choose fd00:1::/64
> being sure that no random generator will make it, and it happens my
> neighbors does the same.  That leads to conflict on fd00:1::/64 and we
> dont want routing enabled between the two.

Generate.  Don't choose.  If you generate then you should be ok.
 
> > Anyway - I'd like to see the draft progress. Has it already had a
> > WGLC?
> 
> I agree, it already has advice in it worth progressing.
> 
> Alex
> 
> >
> > Brian
> >
> >> I am not sure how to translate that into advice, because I am not
> >> sure how it will unfold in the near future.
> >>
> >> Alex
> >>
> >> Le 21/07/2015 16:02, Fred Baker (fred) a crit :
> >>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-v6ops-ula-usage-recommendations
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>>
> "Considerations For Using Unique Local Addresses", Bing Liu, Sheng
> >>> Jiang, 2015-05-03
> >>>
> >>> This draft came up from the floor this afternoon. I think we
> >>> need some concentrated constructive conversation regarding it -
> >>> we have had a lot of the other kind.
> >>>
> >>> What issues do we need to address to complete it. and what
> >>> specific recommendations would that include?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________ v6ops mailing
> >>> list [e-mail] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops
> >>>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________ v6ops mailing list
> >> [e-mail] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops
> >>
> >
> >
> 
> _______________________________________________
> v6ops mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops

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