On 27/May/16 06:11, Kevin Oberman wrote: > There are a lot of excellent reasons to avoid ULAs. There are a very few > good, or even so-so reasons to use them. The most commonly cited reason is > security which is almost always wrong. In almost 20 years of working with > IPv6 I have yet to see any valid security reason for using ULAs. There are > any number of excellent papers on this. > > The most valid use is when you can only get a /64 from your provider. RFCs > recommend a minimum assignment to residential customers of a /56 but many > providers seem to have missed this, so there is no choice. prefixes longer > than /64 are effectively not possible. IPv6 does not care, but the > supporting protocols , make a /64 or shorter assumption. More intractable > is that hardware also often make similar assumptions. As you learned, you > really, really don't waste your time trying to make it work. > > I really guess all of this needs to be in the handbook so people don't > waste time trying to do things that are documented to either not work or > not work effectively. And, unless you are really, really sure you need > ULAs, They mostly just break things.
Fully agree. Mark. _______________________________________________ freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
