On 21-sep-2007, at 17:56, Fred Baker wrote:
There is an obvious inherent bug in that, which has been observed
in the IPv4 Internet with respect to RFC 1918 and martian prefixes.
Administrations that don't apply the policy to deny ULAs will
accept them, which will have the effect of leaking them if the peer
inadvertently advertises them. The problem is that we, as a vendor,
can't really tell the difference between clueful operators and
clueless ones (their money all looks the same), and as a result
make no attempt to save the world from one while trying to satisfy
As a long time user of Cisco products, I think this is a useful
approach. I would be quite upset if I found out that I couldn't use
some kind of private addressing in a training course.
Ietf mailing list