Jan 27 15:08 2019, Victor Sudakov wrote to Markus Reschke:
VS> Good point. Thank you. Maybe fc00::/7 has a chance of becoming the VS> new 192.168/16.
I'd recommend to use fd00::/8 since fc00::/8 was meant to be some kind of globally unique local address space managed by a registry (-> B2B VPNs).
VS> I don't think enterprise-class firewalls have UPnP, do they?
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 IPv6 VS> connectivity are they going to have, what do you think? Those present VS> who have native IPv6 connectivity, what's your ISP's policy on VS> assigning addresses to customers?
/64 as xfer network and a /56 for the LAN (both dynamic, forced change every 6 months).
VS> Interesting. Do you know of any implementations that could translate VS> ULA addresses into one global /64 pool?
Cisco, Juniper, Linux, ... However, you need to check the details for each box and firmware. For example, Linux can hide the complete LAN behind a single IPv6 address.
