[131142] in North American Network Operators' Group
=?windows-1252?Q?Re:_IPv6_fc00::/7_=97_Unique_local_addresses?=
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Owen DeLong)
Wed Oct 20 20:54:46 2010
From: Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com>
In-Reply-To: <20101021003733.D90EA5EFB1D@drugs.dv.isc.org>
Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2010 17:53:36 -0700
To: Mark Andrews <marka@isc.org>
Cc: NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
>
> Or just have the CPE generate a ULA prefix correctly and write it
> to NVRAM so you don't need to re-generate it. The internal prefix
> / addresses *WILL* leak. We know this from our experiences with
> RFC 1918 addresses. Any CPE vendor that fails to generate random
> ULA prefixes should be shot.
>
Any CPE vendor that refuses to implement any special provisions
whatsoever for ULA and leave that entirely to the user with strong
discouragement should be applauded.
Owen
