nanog mailing list archives
Re: Using IPv6 with prefixes shorter than a /64 on a LAN
From: Owen DeLong <owen () delong com>
Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2011 09:29:43 -0800
On Feb 1, 2011, at 7:04 AM, Jack Bates wrote:
On 2/1/2011 12:03 AM, Owen DeLong wrote:The rest... All those TiVOs, Laptops, Desktops, iPads, etc. all need public addresses anyway, so, why bother with the ULA?I think ULA is still useful for home networks. If the home router guys properly generate the ULA dynamically, it should stop conflicts within home networking. There's something to be said for internal services which ULA can be useful for, even when you do fall off the net. Jack
I prefer persistent GUA over ULA for that. Owen
Current thread:
- Re: Using IPv6 with prefixes shorter than a /64 on a LAN Jack Bates (Feb 01)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- Re: Using IPv6 with prefixes shorter than a /64 on a LAN Jack Bates (Feb 01)
- Re: Using IPv6 with prefixes shorter than a /64 on a LAN Owen DeLong (Feb 01)
- Re: Using IPv6 with prefixes shorter than a /64 on a LAN Jack Bates (Feb 01)
- Re: Using IPv6 with prefixes shorter than a /64 on a LAN Owen DeLong (Feb 01)
- Re: Using IPv6 with prefixes shorter than a /64 on a LAN Jack Bates (Feb 01)
- Re: Using IPv6 with prefixes shorter than a /64 on a LAN Owen DeLong (Feb 01)
- Re: Using IPv6 with prefixes shorter than a /64 on a LAN Jack Bates (Feb 01)
- Re: Using IPv6 with prefixes shorter than a /64 on a LAN Owen DeLong (Feb 01)
- Re: Using IPv6 with prefixes shorter than a /64 on a LAN Chuck Anderson (Feb 01)
- Re: Using IPv6 with prefixes shorter than a /64 on a LAN Cameron Byrne (Feb 01)
- Re: Using IPv6 with prefixes shorter than a /64 on a LAN Bill Stewart (Feb 01)
- Re: Using IPv6 with prefixes shorter than a /64 on a LAN Owen DeLong (Feb 01)
- Re: Using IPv6 with prefixes shorter than a /64 on a LAN Owen DeLong (Feb 01)