You can use unrelated addresses at each end if you use RA w/PIO's to inject on-link prefixes in the Prefix Lists on both routers.
Thanks, - Wes Wes Beebee Software Engineer Product Development wbee...@cisco.com United States Cisco.com - http://www.cisco.com For corporate legal information go to: http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/index.html -----Original Message----- From: ipv6-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:ipv6-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of sth...@nethelp.no Sent: Thursday, March 25, 2010 6:13 AM To: i...@69706e6720323030352d30312d31340a.nosense.org Cc: ra...@psg.com; nit...@juniper.net; ipv6@ietf.org; lore...@google.com Subject: Re: router vs. host discussion in 6man today for the /127 draft > I'd like to understand why SONET links don't use ND. Are there any > references to operating IPv6 over SONET that explain why ND can't be > enabled? A SONET/SDH link is a real point to point link. Which means that in principle you can use totally unrelated addresses at each end of the link. There is no need for an address resolution protocol (ND/ARP) because you simply stuff the packet into one end of the point to point link and it comes out at the other end. Unrelated addresses at each end is sometimes used in practice. Nowadays it is more common to simply use a /30 or /31 (IPv4) or /126 (IPv6) to get a "subnet" which encompasses both ends. *Requiring* ND would preclude the use of completely unrelated addresses at each end, wouldn't it? Steinar Haug, Nethelp consulting, sth...@nethelp.no -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 -------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
