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

[Randy Bush]

>> ok, i give.  if ula address space is assigned/managed by 
>> registries, how is it actually different from pi space?
> Basically ULA space has the same 'routability' as RFC1918 space

which is a benefit because ...?  rfc 1918 space is a hack to deal with
an address space shortage.  we are told ipv6 space is effectively
infinite.  hence we do not need rfc 1918 style space.

> with the added benefit of less (or in case of ULA central: no) 
> possibility for conflicting addresses when merging/connecting 
> separate networks.

because, in statistical hope, it will not overlap.  i.e. it does not
even conserve space a la 1918.  so, again, what's the benefit?

> PI space is expected to be routed globally (if the user of the space
> wants to).

as has been amply demonstrated, 1918 space leaks time and again.  so
this ula stuff will leak time and again.

>> if ipv6 space is effectively infinite (and we once thought ipv4 
>> space was), then what is the use of ula address space?  why not 
>> just assign vanilla ipv6 space?
> At this moment there is no IPv6 PI spa

so we do this kinky thing to create a half-assed version of it?  pfui!

randy