This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/address-policy-wg@ripe.net/
[address-policy-wg] 2007-05 New Policy Proposal (IPv6 ULA-Central)
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2007-05 New Policy Proposal (IPv6 ULA-Central)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2007-02 New Policy Proposal (Change in IP Assignments for Anycasting DNS Policy)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Tony Hain
alh-ietf at tndh.net
Tue May 8 13:55:55 CEST 2007
Leo Vegoda wrote: > On 8 May 2007, at 12:01pm, Tony Hain wrote: > > > Randomness could be a natural outcome if the default configuration > > for SOHO > > routers was to create one and bury the ability to specify it under > > some > > 'Advanced/Experts-only' option. > > Do you see a lot of demand for separate internal and external > addressing in SOHO networks? Separating reachability is what firewalling is all about... 'No route' is more effective than the fastest deep packet inspection engine. Consider that the default configuration for a printer should not be to bind to a global prefix because that is generally a local function. There are more examples related to home automation of what is to come, more so than what exists to create current demand. Either way, it is trivial for a SOHO device to generate the random prefix and avoid the problem of people all selecting the same thing. If it gets used or not is a completely independent discussion. Tony
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2007-05 New Policy Proposal (IPv6 ULA-Central)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2007-02 New Policy Proposal (Change in IP Assignments for Anycasting DNS Policy)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]