Re: IPv6 fc00::/7 — Unique local addresses

[Owen DeLong <owen () delong com>]

On Oct 20, 2010, at 9:38 PM, Graham Beneke wrote:

> On 21/10/2010 03:49, Matthew Kaufman wrote:
> > On 10/20/2010 5:51 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
> > > Part 2 will be when the first provider accepts a large sum of money to
> > > route it within their public network between multiple sites owned by
> > > the same customer.
> >
> > Is this happening now with RFC 1918 addresses and IPv4?
>
> I have seen this in some small providers. Doesn't last long since the chance of collision is high. It then becomes a 
> VPN.
Correct... The only reason it isn't is because of the high chance of collision.
Due to virtually guaranteed overlapping address conflicts, it doesn't work
with RFC-1918.

ULA solves that "problem" by providing probably unique addresses.

> > > Part 3 will be when that same provider (or some other provider in the
> > > same boat) takes the next step and starts trading routes of ULA space
> > > with other provider(s).
> >
> > Is this happening now with RFC 1918 addresses and IPv4?
>
> I've seen this too. Once again small providers who pretty quickly get caught out by collisions.
>
> The difference is that ULA could take years or even decades to catch someone out with a collision. By then we'll have 
> a huge mess.
Exactly.

Owen