nanog mailing list archives

Re: using ULA for 'hidden' v6 devices?


From: Cameron Byrne <cb.list6 () gmail com>
Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2012 09:09:53 -0800

On Jan 26, 2012 8:44 AM, "Owen DeLong" <owen () delong com> wrote:


On Jan 26, 2012, at 6:39 AM, Jima wrote:

On 2012-01-26, Owen DeLong wrote:
If you can't point to some specific advantage of ULA over secondary
non-routed GUA prefixes, then, ULA doesn't have a reason to live.

My biggest concern with secondary non-routed GUA would be source address
selection.  If you're trying to talk to something in 2000::/3, it's
obvious to the OS that it should be using its address in 2000::/3 rather
than the one in fc00::/7.  When both the "external" and "internal"
addresses live in 2000::/3, more care has to be taken to ensure the
system DTRT.


It's very easy to configure SAS to handle this. Frankly, you have the
same challenge with ULA in many scenarios.

I'm not sure where DNS64/NAT64 comes into play here for v6 to v6
communication. For IPv4, I don't see any advantage in ULA+NAT64 vs. the
more reliable and easier RFC-1918 with NAT44 possibilities, even if you
have to run multiple RFC-1918 domains to get enough addresses, that
will
generally be less complicated and break fewer things than a NAT64
implementation.

My best guess there is the ability to a) only manage a single-stack
network (I really wish more software supported IPv6 so this could be a
more feasible reality), and b) use the same NAT64 prefix across various
NAT64 instances (64:ff9b::/96 is a blocker if you actually want to allow
NAT64 to RFC1918 space).  While I can see the potential appeal of the
second point, I'm not sure I'd agree with it myself.


But with NAT64, you're supporting both stacks, you just move the problem
around.

Having done experiments with both methods, I assure you it is a true
statement based on experience. NAT64 really offers more problems than it
solves, not the least of which is the stateful DNS interaction problem.


I have a very different opinion. Nat64/ dns64 fits my needs great

Horses for courses.

Cb

Owen




Current thread: