[102150] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: IPv6 questions
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (snort bsd)
Tue Jan 29 16:56:40 2008
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 13:55:46 -0800 (PST)
From: snort bsd <snortbsd@yahoo.com.au>
To: swm@emanon.com, Erik Nordmark <erik.nordmark@sun.com>
Cc: nanog@merit.edu, juniper-nsp <juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net>
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
It does make sense though. Say one megabits interface with 20 VLANs. In tha=
t scenario, every VLAN, usually has own link-local address. It is more prac=
tical than "multiple interfaces with same link-local address."=0A=0AI found=
this on Juniper router and now assume it is Juniper specific implementatio=
n.=0A=0AThanks all=0A=0A----- Original Message ----=0AFrom: Scott Morris <s=
wm@emanon.com>=0ATo: Erik Nordmark <erik.nordmark@sun.com>; snort bsd <snor=
tbsd@yahoo.com.au>=0ACc: nanog@merit.edu; juniper-nsp <juniper-nsp@puck.net=
her.net>=0ASent: Tuesday, 29 January, 2008 12:36:55 PM=0ASubject: RE: IPv6 =
questions=0A=0A=0AAnd unless you are on only certain particular devices (e.=
g. L3=0A switches)=0Athen the end device won't necessarily have any relevan=
t clue what VLAN=0A it's=0Aon.=0A=0AI have never seen/heard of an RFC for i=
t either and would certainly=0A wonder=0A"WHY?". :)=0A=0AScott =0A=0A-----=
Original Message-----=0AFrom: owner-nanog@merit.edu [mailto:owner-nanog@mer=
it.edu] On Behalf Of=0A Erik=0ANordmark=0ASent: Tuesday, January 29, 2008 1=
:44 PM=0ATo: snort bsd=0ACc: nanog@merit.edu; juniper-nsp=0ASubject: Re: IP=
v6 questions=0A=0A=0Asnort bsd wrote:=0A> Never mind=0A> =0A> it is the VLA=
N number. But which RFC define this? =0A=0AI've never seen an IPv6 RFC spec=
ify to put the VLAN number in the=0A link-local=0Aaddress.=0AThus this must=
be an (odd) choice made by some implementation. Perhaps=0A the=0Aimplement=
ation somehow requires that all the link-local addresses for=0A all=0Aits (=
sub)interfaces be unique, even though the RFCs assume that the=0Aimplementa=
tion should be able to deal with multiple interfaces with=0A same=0Asame li=
nk-local address.=0A=0A Erik=0A=0A> Thanks all=0A> =0A> Dave=0A> =0A> --=
--- Original Message ----=0A> From: snort bsd <snortbsd@yahoo.com.au>=0A> T=
o: nanog@merit.edu; juniper-nsp <juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net>=0A> Sent: Mon=
day, 28 January, 2008 3:05:59 PM=0A> Subject: IPv6 questions=0A> =0A> =0A> =
Hi All:=0A> =0A> With link-local IPv6 address, the converting from MAC-48 t=
o EDU-64 =0A> address format (FF FE stuffing). How does the VLAN tags affe=
ct the =0A> conversion?=0A> =0A> With the rule of FF FE stuffing, I can se=
e clearly work on the ptp =0A> interfaces. But on those Ethernet based VLA=
Ns, it doesn't seem to =0A> follow that pattern:=0A> =0A> Current address:=
00:90:69:4a:b9:5d, Hardware address: =0A> 00:90:69:4a:b9:5d=0A> =0A> well,=
i assume the link-local should be fe80::290:69ff:fe4a:b95d/64.=0A> actual=
ly, it shows:=0A> =0A> Destination: fe80::/64, Local: fe80::290:6903:94a:b9=
5d=0A> =0A> how does the router get this 03 09 instead of ff fe?=0A> =0A> T=
hanks all=0A> =0A> =0A> =0A> =0A> =0A> =0A> =0A> =0A> Make the switch=
to the world's best email. Get the new Yahoo!7=0A =0A> Mail now. www.yaho=
o7.com.au/worldsbestemail=0A> =0A> =0A> =0A> =0A> =0A> =0A> =0A> Make=
the switch to the world's best email. Get the new Yahoo!7 =0A> Mail now. w=
ww.yahoo7.com.au/worldsbestemail=0A> =0A> =0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A Mak=
e the switch to the world's best email. Get the new Yahoo!7 Mail now. www.y=
ahoo7.com.au/worldsbestemail=0A=0A
