[ipv6hackers] Dynamic prefixes & privacy (was: IPv6 prefix changing)

Tim Chown tjc at ecs.soton.ac.uk
Tue Mar 20 22:34:13 CET 2012

On 17 Mar 2012, at 22:55, Owen DeLong wrote:
> ULA brings nothing meaningful to the table.

There is an I-D on ULA usage, see http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-liu-v6ops-ula-usage-analysis-02.  I would assume the authors would like feedback.

Having ULA-ULA communication in a homenet is a good thing if that means internal connections are not dropped if the accompanying global prefix changes.

In the homenet scenario, it seems some LLN vendors say they only want to use ULAs.


More information about the Ipv6hackers mailing list