[address-policy-wg] Re: Can the RIRs bypass the IETF and do their own thing?

On 2007-05-11 16:14, Fred Baker wrote:
...
> One technical question I would ask. What does a "Central Authority" and 
> "IANA Assignment" have to do with a "Local" address of any type? It 
> seems in context that the major issue is an address prefix that is not 
> advertised to neighboring ISPs and can be generally configured to be 
> refused if offered by a neighboring ISP, in the same way that an RFC 
> 1918 address is not advertised and is generally refused between IPv4 
> networks. In any draft on this topic, regardless of where it is 
> discussed, if central assignment is in view, the reason for having such 
> assignment should be clearly stated.

Fred, the point is that ULAs should be unambiguous, so that if they
happen to meet (e.g. via a VPN, or following a merge of two previously
separate networks) there is no collision. Currently ULAs include
a pseudo-random prefix, which leaves open a theoretical possibility
of collision. Centrally-allocated ULAs would not have this issue.

     Brian