Mark Andrews wrote: > > And if you stop thinking IPv6 == IPv4 + big addresses and > start thinking multiple IPv6 addresses including a ULA IPv6 > address + RFC 3484 you get local address stability without > needing a NAT. You use ULAs for internal communication and > global addresses for external communication. > > This isn't future stuff, you can do this today. You can > renumber your external addresses daily and keep internal > sessions up for weeks. it might work for two party applications on hosts that are configured to prefer ULAs to global addresses when the destination address is also a ULA. problem is, sometimes that's exactly the wrong choice. the API and stack don't know whether the application has a greater need for a global address (e.g. for referrals) or a local address (for stability). and just because a ULA exists for both source and destination does not inherently mean those addresses are more stable than other addresses that are available, nor does it mean that traffic is routed between source ULA and destination ULA. Keith _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf