[131178] in North American Network Operators' Group
=?windows-1252?Q?Re:_IPv6_fc00::/7_=97_Unique_local_addresses?=
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Owen DeLong)
Thu Oct 21 03:59:46 2010
From: Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com>
In-Reply-To: <4CBF9B7A.1000500@matthew.at>
Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2010 00:57:11 -0700
To: matthew@matthew.at
Cc: NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Oct 20, 2010, at 6:46 PM, Matthew Kaufman wrote:
> On 10/20/2010 6:20 PM, Mark Smith wrote:
>>=20
>> To make it clear, as it seems to be quite misunderstood, you'd have
>> both ULA and global addressing in your network.
>=20
> Right. Just like to multihome with IPv6 you would have both PA =
addresses from provider #1 and PA addresses from provider #2 in your =
network.
>=20
Or PI addresses from an RIR.
> Only nobody wants to do that either.
>=20
There are lots of good reasons not to want to do that.
Owen
