Re: Request To Advance : "Unique Local IPv6 Unicast Addresses"

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

On Feb 20, 2004, at 12:17 PM, Tony Hain wrote:

> Alain,
>
> The current document does not enforce a business model (earlier 
> versions
> did), but does set technical constraints.
I disagree. There are no technical constraints that mandates that the 
allocations
have to be permanent. As such, I believe it is up to the entity in 
charge of the allocation to decide
to give permanent allocations or charge recurrent fees, not the IETF.


> Personally I don't think it is
> possible to 'Provide mechanisms that prevent hoarding', so the 
> requirement
> 'without any procedure for de-allocation' creates a problem once 
> hoarding
> has been detected. I do not object to the current document as this 
> specific
> issue will be resolved by an update once the system is in operation and
> practical experience exposes that flaw.
Permanent, irrevocable allocations of chunks of finite address space
are, IMHO, not very wise. But again, this is address assignment policy, 
not IETF business.

> Recommending against all-zero's is not only a waste of time, it 
> specifically
> directs people to the thing you are trying to avoid. There is nothing 
> that a
> document can do to prevent a consultant from configuring all of his
> customers with the same prefix. He can run [RANDOM] once and use that
> everywhere, yet is in full compliance with the document. Even more of a
> problem, an equipment manufacturer could run [RANDOM] once and burn 
> that
> value into every piece of equipment they ship. The best a document can 
> do is
> highlight the issues raised by duplicate assignments, and provide a
> mechanism which solves them if used as directed.
This is exactly what I'm asking for. I like TIm Chown suggestion few 
days ago.

> As much as some people want
> to, it is not the IETF's job to legislate operational behavior. The 
> language
> in this document is appropriate and it should be published.
No it is not, as there are known issues and it is the wg duty to at 
least mention them.

	- Alain.


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