nanog mailing list archives
Re: subnet prefix length > 64 breaks IPv6?
From: Glen Kent <glen.kent () gmail com>
Date: Sat, 24 Dec 2011 15:37:02 +0530
Ok. So does SLAAC break with masks > 64? Glen On Sat, Dec 24, 2011 at 12:38 PM, <sthaug () nethelp no> wrote:
I am not sure if this is the reason as this only applies to the link local IP address. One could still assign a global IPv6 address. So, why does basic IPv6 (ND process, etc) break if i use a netmask of say /120?As long as you assign addresses statically, IPv6 works just fine with a netmask > 64. We've been using this for several years now. No problem. Steinar Haug, Nethelp consulting, sthaug () nethelp no
Current thread:
- subnet prefix length > 64 breaks IPv6? Glen Kent (Dec 23)
- Re: subnet prefix length > 64 breaks IPv6? sthaug (Dec 23)
- Re: subnet prefix length > 64 breaks IPv6? Glen Kent (Dec 24)
- Re: subnet prefix length > 64 breaks IPv6? Karl Auer (Dec 24)
- Re: subnet prefix length > 64 breaks IPv6? Alexandru Petrescu (Dec 24)
- Re: subnet prefix length > 64 breaks IPv6? Glen Kent (Dec 24)
- Re: subnet prefix length > 64 breaks IPv6? Jonathan Lassoff (Dec 24)
- Re: subnet prefix length > 64 breaks IPv6? Glen Kent (Dec 24)
- Re: subnet prefix length > 64 breaks IPv6? sthaug (Dec 23)
- Re: subnet prefix length > 64 breaks IPv6? Sven Olaf Kamphuis (Dec 24)
- Re: subnet prefix length > 64 breaks IPv6? Glen Kent (Dec 26)
- Re: subnet prefix length > 64 breaks IPv6? Glen Kent (Dec 27)
- Re: subnet prefix length > 64 breaks IPv6? Valdis . Kletnieks (Dec 27)
- Re: subnet prefix length > 64 breaks IPv6? Joel Maslak (Dec 27)