If I recall there were a few ipv6 calculators out on the web.  Take a look at 
those, but I have used this theory in labs before and it works fine.

Regards,
 Joe Sanchez

( please excuse the brevity of this email as it was sent via a mobile device.  
Please excuse misspelled words or sentence structure.) 

On Sep 12, 2012, at 5:41 AM, Bal Birdy <[email protected]> wrote:

> Ok I know that it's stipulated that IPv6 should be a /64, and never really
> change, but I came across some slides talking about using /126 or /127s for
> point to point links (which sparked a discussion at work). Thinking along
> the lines of the /30 concept with IPv4, for arguments sake, if I wanted to
> work out what IP addresses I can manually configure on either end of my p2p
> link, that's using IPv6, am I right in saying I use the same approach as
> with IPv4 for working out the IP addresses.
> 
> So if I say a /126 is - 1111111111111100 in binary. The last two bits give
> me networks of 0,4,8 and so on. with usable ip's of 1,2 and 3. Now the 3
> comes into play as there's no concept of broadcast in IPv6 (!?), so why do
> we need the broadcast IP as previously required for IPv4???
> 
> Is this technically correct?
> 
> Thanks
> Bal
> _______________________________________________
> For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please 
> visit www.ipexpert.com
> 
> Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out 
> www.PlatinumPlacement.com
> 
> http://onlinestudylist.com/mailman/listinfo/ccie_rs
_______________________________________________
For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit 
www.ipexpert.com

Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out 
www.PlatinumPlacement.com

http://onlinestudylist.com/mailman/listinfo/ccie_rs

Reply via email to