[ppml] question on 2006-2 v6 internal microallocation

[Michael.Dillon at btradianz.com]

>    well that might be tough, since site-local has been depricated,
>    however, sites can use ULA prefixes w/o fear, since the IETF
>    has carved out some unicast space as a free-for-all space...
>    no RIR involvement is possible.  Just carve out what you want/need
>    and go with it!!!

Officially there is no such thing as ULA. There are no 
RFCs which reference this.

On the other hand, there is an RFC 4193 which seems
appropriate. http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc4193.txt

When educating people, it pays to double check your 
facts and make sure that your terminology is clear.

So, given that RFC 4193 exists, should 2006-2 be
changed in some way? Should 2006-2 explicitly refer
to RFC 4193?

--Michael Dillon