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

Gert Doering gert at space.net
Wed Mar 21 19:15:17 CET 2012


On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 03:52:20PM -0700, Owen DeLong wrote:
> Apple could easily have obtained an IPv6 GUA prefix for this purpose. The use of ULA is entirely optional.
> Free your mind from the IPv4 private vs. public address mindset and allow yourself to consider a world where
> GUA is relatively easy to obtain and can be used for non-connected purposes without penalty or difficulty.

"GUAs distributed with the intention of not having them routable world-wide"
is different from ULAs in exactly which way?

> I realize that this would require some RIR policy changes and I support those. If the IETF will get on board
> with recognizing that local GUA is a better alternative than ULA, then I don't think it would be hard to get
> the RIRs to adopt appropriate policy around this.

ULA-C would be that, but the IETF seems to have abandoned that idea.

Gert Doering
        -- NetMaster
have you enabled IPv6 on something today...?

SpaceNet AG                        Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14          Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann
D-80807 Muenchen                   HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen)
Tel: +49 (89) 32356-444            USt-IdNr.: DE813185279

More information about the Ipv6hackers mailing list