Grzegorz Janoszka wrote:
Phil Mayers wrote:
Grzegorz Janoszka wrote:
Daniel Verlouw wrote:
No real experience with HSRP though, can anyone shed some light on that?
I understand it only works for link-local addresses?
Yes, unfortunately it is only link-local. I am just trying to figure
it out how to marry link-local with our global ipv6 assignments.
That's now the way it works AFAICT.
Basically, the routers still send router-advertisments. However, the
link-local address in the next-hop is the HSRPv6 virtual IP, and floats
between the active & backup.
So you only *need* the link-local.
But it is strange indeed. We tell everyone that v6 is just the same as
v4, but just the issues as above makes our customers scary.
It is odd, and takes some getting used to.
So, we assign 2001:0db8:85a3:08d3::/64 on a customer port, with a
gateway fe80:0db8:85a3:08d3::1 - how does it look? Is it the same as we
do with v4? :)
Well, no ;o)
TBH the link-local is one of the things that IPv6 did really make a good
choice on (killing fragmentation is another)
It looks even weirder if you run an OSPFv3 network with nothing but
loopbacks & link-local - kind of like "ip unnumbered" everywhere!
Do you have any plans for such IP division? I just thought about
replacing first 16 bits of public v6 address with fe80, but maybe you
have better ideas.
I don't understand; all link-local IPs are
fe80::/64
i.e. link-local are always fe80:0000:0000:0000:<the mac>
You can't change this I think.
_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
