[ppml] [address-policy-wg] Those pesky ULAs again

> ULA-C sounds to me like a request to the guys who spin silicon to help
> people keep from screwing up their router configs.  If someone can't
> manage to filter their BGP such that they keep some (or all) of their
> space private, I don't see why Cisco, Juniper, et al., need to do
> that for them.

or that the router vendors will do a more reliable job of it, given the
complexity of knowing what is a site border and what is not, especially
when folk are saying that there are actually multiple entities inside
the border.

and do we really want the vendors to hard-code address filters in the
sillycone?

this is the path on which site-local died, and the death was a good thing.

RFC 1925 2(11) “Every old idea will be proposed again with a different
name and a different presentation, regardless of whether it works.”

randy