[148855] in North American Network Operators' Group
using ULA for 'hidden' v6 devices?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Justin M. Streiner)
Wed Jan 25 10:52:35 2012
Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2012 10:51:46 -0500 (EST)
From: "Justin M. Streiner" <streiner@cluebyfour.org>
To: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
Is anyone using ULA (RFC 4193) address space for v6 infrastructure that
does not need to be exposed to the outside world? I understand the
concept of having fc00::/8 being doled out by the RIRs never went
anywhere, and using space out of fd00::/8 can be a bit of a crap-shoot
because of the likelihood of many organizations that do so not following
the algorithm for picking a /48 that is outlined in the RFC.
There would appear to be reasonable arguments for and against using ULA.
I'm just curious about what people are doing in practice.
jms
