[159916] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: IPV6 in enterprise best practices/white papaers
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Karl Auer)
Tue Jan 29 05:08:19 2013
From: Karl Auer <kauer@biplane.com.au>
To: nanog@nanog.org
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2013 21:07:57 +1100
In-Reply-To: <20130129083710.GD11441@besserwisser.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Tue, 2013-01-29 at 09:37 +0100, Måns Nilsson wrote:
> Subject: Re: IPV6 in enterprise best practices/white papaers Date: Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 08:45:39PM +0400 Quoting Mukom Akong T. (mukom.tamon@gmail.com):
> > On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 7:27 PM, Eugeniu Patrascu <eugen@imacandi.net>wrote:
> >
> > Does an L2 switch really care about IPv6? (except for stuff like DHCPv6
> > snooping, etc?)
>
> For management it does care. NO ipv4 is NO ipv4. As in not even
> management addresses.
Also, if a switch does not do MLD snooping, it will flood multicast to
all ports. You lose one of the major benefits of IPv6 multicast - less
admin traffic.
You need to spec new switches with IPv6 capability.
Regards, K.
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Karl Auer (kauer@biplane.com.au)
http://www.biplane.com.au/kauer
http://www.biplane.com.au/blog
GPG fingerprint: B862 FB15 FE96 4961 BC62 1A40 6239 1208 9865 5F9A
Old fingerprint: AE1D 4868 6420 AD9A A698 5251 1699 7B78 4EEE 6017
