[arin-ppml] GUA vs ULA vs ?
farmer at umn.edu
Tue Mar 30 16:53:38 EDT 2010
michael.dillon at bt.com wrote:
>>> I am overwhelmed with the number of posts regarding the whole
>>> 'Non-connected networks', so I'll admit freely that I haven't been
>>> able to keep up.
> What on earth are non-connected networks? The very essence of
> a network is connectivity. This phrase should be erased from
> our discussions because it is confusing and an oxymoron.
You are probably right, but I started the conversation with that term
because that is what it was called in ARIN's IPv4 policy. Not
necessarily a good reason, but a reason.
>>> - I'm a bit behind the curve on some of the abbreviations, but I
>>> believe that this is correct:
>>> --- ULA == Unique Local Address
>>> --- GUA == Global Unique Address
>>> If that is the case, here is how I feel...
>> That is how I have been using them and I believe others are
>> using them to mean that too.
> A simple Google search would show that the IETF folks
> use GUA to mean Global Unicast Addresses.
> The ULA-C addresses that we are discussing would be
> globally unique addresses but are clearly not GUA
> because they are not from FC00::/7
Sorry, I'd swear that said "Global Unicast Address" when I read it, but
you are correct.
>> Personally, I'd like to have the IETF define FC00::/8 for
>> this purpose, and delegate it to IANA to allocate to the RIRs
> RFC 4193 is very muddy when it comes to laying out how the
> FC00::/7 addresss are defined. First of all, the FC00 part
> is hexadecimal, so each letter refers to 4 bits of the
> address. Given the /7 part, this means that only the F and
> 3 bits from the C, are fixed. The L bit, which determines
> whether it is ULA-C or ULA-RANDOM (called ULA-L by IETF folk)
> is part of that C digit. This means that addresses beginning
> with FD, are ULA-L (ULA-RANDOM). Addresses beginning with
> FC are currently in limbo because they are defined by the
> RFC, but not yet assigned to IANA.
> So, FD00::/8 are the ULA-L randomly assigned unique unicast
> addresses intended for local use.
> And FC00::/8 are indeed the ULA-C addresses that need another
> RFC in order to instruct IANA to allocate them to RIRs.
>> for assignment to organizations using process similar to
>> those used for GUA today and using policies designated by the
> This risks people doing things like blocking ULA-C addresses
> from other RIR regions but routing them openly in one region.
> The current thinking has been to allocate them randomly so
> that they cannot be aggregated either by network or by region.
See, my other post;
>>> - So that the maintainers of BOGON lists (eg: Team Cymru)
>> can hold one
>> Agreed. And, FC00::/7 is already in their BOGON list.
> Sadly, no. Nor are the old 6bone addresses in their bogon list.
> Not even SIXXS <http://www.sixxs.net/tools/grh/bogons/> includes
> these as bogons.
I'll admit I didn't look that closely, but when I Googled it (Cymru
ipv6) I got the following;
FC00::/7 is listed under 3-1-1-1-2 for ingress packet filter and
3-1-2-1-2 ingress prefix filter. You are right that they don't have the
old 6Bone in the filter though.
>> Your /32 presumably is a GUA-PA provider allocation not an
>> GUA-PI end-user assignment.
> Do we really need to change PA and PI to have a GUA prefix?
No, write me up a definitive style sheet for PPML post and I'll follow
> --Michael Dillon
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net).
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
David Farmer Email:farmer at umn.edu
Networking & Telecommunication Services
Office of Information Technology
University of Minnesota
2218 University Ave SE Phone: 612-626-0815
Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029 Cell: 612-812-9952
More information about the ARIN-PPML