• @theit8514@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    06 months ago

    Yes, ULA are one of the exceptions I mentioned. It covers fc00::/7 which is fc00 to fdff, though I believe most use just the top half. I use one for an intermediate network between my edge router and my primary firewall to not consume one of my limited /64 networks.

    I haven’t played with IPV6 NAT much. I know its use is a bit discouraged as NAT was always designed as a stopgap measure for IPV4 exhaustion. It might be a good option if you need additional space and your ISP doesn’t support additional prefixes. Just keep in mind that if you use these in DNS, they won’t be accessible externally.

    • @tburkhol@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      36 months ago

      Yeah, my ISP “supports” IPv6, but assigns a /128 to users. It seems to wipe out most of the desirable features of IPv6, and has probably given me a distorted view of its philosophy. OTOH, it did force me to learn how to do DNS views, so names can have the ULA address inside and the global address outside the house, which is pretty cool.

    • @vividspecter@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      1
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      The downside with ULA is that ipv4 is given preference, which is annoying on dual stack networks. I believe there is a draft RFC to change this but it will take a while for it to be approved and longer still for OSes to change their behaviour. I workaround it by using one of the unused (but not ULA) prefixes.