Re: IPv6 w.g. Last Call on "Unique Local IPv6 Unicast Addresses"

[Alain Durand <Alain.Durand@Sun.COM>]

I think that this effort is not ready for prime time.

This document is creating a explosive cocktail made of:

	- policy: creation of a new authority to perform address assignment 
outside of the regular channels
	- economy: imposition of a fixed one time fee model, preventing 
competition
                              and creating a swamp of untraceable 
registrations
	- politics: dangerous instructions to IANA, see Geofff Houston comments
	- technology: half baked ideas that do not analyze seriously their 
impact:
		- what about reverse DNS?
		- what about address selection rules?
		- what about address leakage?
		- how to debug those networks when they will leak?
		  and it is impossible to map those prefixes back to their owner?

All this is designed to address what is mostly a perception/social 
problem which justification only resides in
a self serving companion document that fails to demonstrate that such 
local addresses
are actually needed/required.

In a rush to create something to replace the Site Local addresses,
I'm afraid this document is playing the apprentice sorcerer and will 
create more
long term damage than its author think.

	- Alain.


--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
ipv6@ietf.org
Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------