Dear Markus,   
      
   27 Jan 19 13:49, you wrote to me:   
      
    VS>> Good point. Thank you. Maybe fc00::/7 has a chance of becoming   
    VS>> the new 192.168/16.   
      
    MR> I'd recommend to use fd00::/8 since fc00::/8 was meant to be some kind   
    MR> of globally unique local address space managed by a registry (-> B2B   
    MR> VPNs).   
      
   fc00::/7 is from RFC4193, and where is fd00::/8 defined?   
      
    VS>> I don't think enterprise-class firewalls have UPnP, do they?   
      
    MR> Most don't. But you never know what e-junk some company uses. >:)   
      
    VS>> And thinking about SOHO and home routers/firewalls, what kind of   
    VS>> IPv6 connectivity are they going to have, what do you think?   
    VS>> Those present who have native IPv6 connectivity, what's your   
    VS>> ISP's policy on assigning addresses to customers?   
      
    MR> /64 as xfer network and a /56 for the LAN (both dynamic, forced change   
    MR> every 6 months).   
      
   If you want a static address?   
      
    VS>> Interesting. Do you know of any implementations that could   
    VS>> translate ULA addresses into one global /64 pool?   
      
    MR> Cisco, Juniper, Linux, ...   
    MR> However, you need to check the details for each box and firmware. For   
    MR> example, Linux can hide the complete LAN behind a single IPv6 address.   
      
   That's nice.   
      
   Victor Sudakov, VAS4-RIPE, VAS47-RIPN   
   --- GoldED+/BSD 1.1.5-b20160322-b20160322   
    * Origin: Ulthar (2:5005/49)