[ppml] question on 2006-2 v6 internal microallocation

[Michael.Dillon at btradianz.com]

> RFC 4193 ULAs do not insure global uniqueness, nor do they offer an
> outside authority that documents if a given organization has a 
legitimate
> claim to use a specific address in the event of a collision.
> 
> We need a mechanism to guarantee global uniqueness between us and our
> managed customer networks.

We are in the same position. In addition, we operate a global
internetwork that is disjoint from the public Internet. Nevertheless,
it is an internetwork connecting over 10,000 sites from well over
a thousand different organizations. There the requirement for 
globally unique registered addresses is exactly the same as the
Internet requirement.

Given that v6 has the address space available, I don't see why
the reticence to allow for microallocations. I can guarantee that
any prefixes in our global routing table will have zero impact
on the public Internet routing table because as a matter of policy
we do not allow routes to be exchanged with the public Internet.
And I believe there are several other such global Internets in 
existence, perhaps as many as a dozen. IP addresses, v6 or 
otherwise, are not the exclusive property of the public Internet.
They belong to everybody who uses the Internet Protocol (IP)
regardless of whether they exchange routes on the public network.

--Michael Dillon