Skip to main content

Unintended Operational Issues With ULA

Document Type Expired Internet-Draft (v6ops WG)
Expired & archived
Authors Nick Buraglio , Chris Cummings , Russ White
Last updated 2023-10-20 (Latest revision 2023-04-18)
Replaces draft-buraglio-v6ops-ula
RFC stream Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)
Additional resources Mailing list discussion
Stream WG state WG Document
Document shepherd (None)
IESG IESG state Expired
Consensus boilerplate Unknown
Telechat date (None)
Responsible AD (None)
Send notices to (None)

This Internet-Draft is no longer active. A copy of the expired Internet-Draft is available in these formats:


The behavior of ULA addressing as defined by [RFC6724] is preferred below legacy IPv4 addressing, thus rendering ULA IPv6 deployment functionally unusable in IPv4 / IPv6 dual-stacked environments. The lack of a consistent and supportable way to manipulate this behavior, across all platforms and at scale is counter to the operational behavior of GUA IPv6 addressing on nearly all modern operating systems that leverage a preference model based on [RFC6724] .


Nick Buraglio
Chris Cummings
Russ White

(Note: The e-mail addresses provided for the authors of this Internet-Draft may no longer be valid.)