[153875] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: IPv6 Lo. for 6PE/6VPE
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (valdis.kletnieks@vt.edu)
Fri Jun 15 09:08:23 2012
To: "Nagendra Kumar (naikumar)" <naikumar@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 15 Jun 2012 10:52:17 -0000."
<47E76F08F1BCF5458111C1939C7B9C4602999F@xmb-rcd-x03.cisco.com>
From: valdis.kletnieks@vt.edu
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2012 09:07:20 -0400
Cc: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>, Daniel Roesen <dr@cluenet.de>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
--==_Exmh_1339765640_2056P
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
On Fri, 15 Jun 2012 10:52:17 -0000, "Nagendra Kumar (naikumar)" said:
> 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.
How the heck is that supposed to work in an all-IPv6 network where you don't
*have* an ipv4-addr? Plus, as Owen noted, leaking those on the wire is
considered bad form.
--==_Exmh_1339765640_2056P
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Exmh version 2.5 07/13/2001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=4b4B
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--==_Exmh_1339765640_2056P--
