[153872] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: IPv6 Lo. for 6PE/6VPE
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Owen DeLong)
Fri Jun 15 07:41:10 2012
From: Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com>
In-Reply-To: <47E76F08F1BCF5458111C1939C7B9C4602999F@xmb-rcd-x03.cisco.com>
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2012 04:35:51 -0700
To: "Nagendra Kumar (naikumar)" <naikumar@cisco.com>
Cc: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>, Daniel Roesen <dr@cluenet.de>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
If it does, that's bad... You should never see IPv4 mapped addresses on =
the wire.
They should only be an internal representation of an IPv4 packet within =
the host.
Owen
On Jun 15, 2012, at 3:52 AM, Nagendra Kumar (naikumar) wrote:
> Hi,
>=20
> Per my understanding, it is not required to have ipv6 address in =
loopback intf on all P routers inorder to have 6PE work. If I remember =
it correctly, P router will use ::FFFF::<ipv4-addr> while originating =
ICMPv6 error message.
>=20
> -Nagendra
>=20
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Daniel Roesen [mailto:dr@cluenet.de]=20
> Sent: Friday, June 15, 2012 4:02 PM
> To: nanog@nanog.org
> Subject: Re: IPv6 Lo. for 6PE/6VPE
>=20
> On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 11:56:05AM +0200, mohamed Osama Saad Abo sree =
wrote:
>> I was just wondering , while I'm planning my network to support=20
>> 6PE/6VPE why should i assign an IPv6 for Loopbacks?
>>=20
>> Maybe it's needed for Point-Point links or external interfaces =
between=20
>> my peers, but anyone here know why i should assign IPv6 for all my=20
>> Routers inside my ISP if we will run PE/6VPE not dual stack.
>=20
> Otherwise the intermediate P devices do not have an address to source
> ICMPv6 "hop count exceeded" error replies =3D> traceroute doesn't work =
properly.
>=20
> Best regards,
> Daniel
>=20
> --
> CLUE-RIPE -- Jabber: dr@cluenet.de -- dr@IRCnet -- PGP: 0xA85C8AA0
>=20
