Analysis and recommendation for the ULA usage
draft-liu-v6ops-ula-usage-analysis-01

The information below is for an old version of the document
Document Type Active Internet-Draft (individual)
Last updated 2012-03-12
Replaced by draft-ietf-v6ops-ula-usage-recommendations
Stream (None)
Intended RFC status (None)
Formats pdf htmlized bibtex
Stream Stream state (No stream defined)
Consensus Boilerplate Unknown
RFC Editor Note (None)
IESG IESG state I-D Exists
Telechat date
Responsible AD (None)
Send notices to (None)
Network Working Group                                            B. Liu
Internet Draft                                                 S. Jiang
Intended status: Best Current Practice     Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd
Expires: September 12, 2012                                    C. Byrne
                                                           T-Mobile USA
                                                         March 12, 2012

               Analysis and recommendation for the ULA usage
                 draft-liu-v6ops-ula-usage-analysis-01.txt

Status of this Memo

   This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
   provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute working
   documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-Drafts is
   at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.

   Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
   and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
   time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
   material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."

   This Internet-Draft will expire on September 12, 2012.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2012 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors. All rights reserved.

   This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
   Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
   (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
   publication of this document. Please review these documents carefully,
   as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect to this
   document.

Abstract

   This document describes use cases where ULA address may be
   beneficially used.

Liu, et al.          Expires September 12, 2012               [Page 1]
Internet-Draft      draft-liu-v6ops-ula-analysis            March 2012

Table of Contents

   1. Introduction ................................................ 2
   2. The features of ULA ......................................... 2
      2.1. Globally unique......................................... 2
      2.2. Independent address space .............................. 3
      2.3. Well known prefix ...................................... 3
   3. ULA usage analysis .......................................... 3
      3.1. ULA-only deployment..................................... 4
      3.2. ULA with PA ............................................ 5
      3.3. Special routing/prefix.................................. 6
      3.4. Used as identifier ..................................... 7
   4. Security Considerations ..................................... 7
   5. IANA Considerations ......................................... 8
   6. Conclusions ................................................. 8
   7. References .................................................. 8
      7.1. Normative References ................................... 8
      7.2. Informative References ................................. 8
   8. Acknowledgments ............................................. 9

1. Introduction

   Unique Local Addresses (ULAs) are defined in RFC 4193 [RFC4193] as
   provider-independent prefixes that can be used on isolated networks,
   internal networks, and VPNs. Although ULAs may be treated like global
   scope by applications, normally they are not used on the publicly
   routable internet.

   However, the ULAs haven't been widely used since IPv6 hasn't been
   widely deployed yet.

   The use of ULA addresses in various types of networks has been confused
   for network operators. Some network operators believe ULAs are not
   useful at all while other network operators run their entire networks on
   ULA address space. This document attempts to clarify the advantages and
   disadvantages of ULAs and how they can be most appropriately used.

   (Editor's note: This draft welcomes any existing practice of
   deploying ULA to be discussed.)

2. The features of ULA

2.1. Globally unique

   ULA is intended to be globally unique to avoid collision. Since the
   hosts assigned with ULA may occasionally be merged into one network,

Liu, et al.          Expires September 12, 2012               [Page 2]
Internet-Draft      draft-liu-v6ops-ula-analysis            March 2012

   this uniqueness is necessary. The prefix uniqueness is based on
   randomization of 40 bits and is considered random enough to ensure a
   high degree of uniqueness and make merging of networks simple and
   without the need to renumbering overlapping IP address space.
   Overlapping is cited as a deficiency with how [RFC1918] addresses were
   deployed, and ULA was designed to overcome this deficiency.

   Notice that, as described in [RFC4864], in practice, applications may
Show full document text