nanog mailing list archives
Re: Internet Edge Router replacement - IPv6 route tablesizeconsiderations
From: James Stahr <stahr () mailbag com>
Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2011 12:55:33 -0600
At 01:33 AM 3/11/2011, Owen DeLong wrote:
On Mar 10, 2011, at 11:22 PM, Dobbins, Roland wrote: > > On Mar 11, 2011, at 2:02 PM, Owen DeLong wrote: >>> Frankly, unless you have parallel links, there isn't a definite need to even number PtoP links for IPv6. >> Every thing you need to do with an interface specific address on a PtoP link can be done with link local.> > Which is why IP unnumbered caught on so well in IPv4-land, heh? > There's a HUGE difference between IP unnumbered and link-local. Frankly, absent parallel links, there was a lot to be said for IP unnumbered and I think that if people had better understood the implications of where and when it was a good vs. bad idea and tied it properly to loopbacks instead of $RANDOM_INTERFACE, it might have caught on better. Owen
Is anyone else considering only using link local for their PtoP links? I realized while deploying our IPv6 infrastructure that OSPFv3 uses the link-local address in the routing table and than the global address, so if I want to have a routing table which makes sense, I need to statically assign a global address AND the link-local address. Then I realized, why even assign a global in the first place? Traceroutes replies end up using the loopback. BGP will use loopbacks. So is there any obvious harm in this approach that I'm missing?
-James
Current thread:
- RE: Internet Edge Router replacement - IPv6 route table sizeconsiderations, (continued)
- RE: Internet Edge Router replacement - IPv6 route table sizeconsiderations George Bonser (Mar 10)
- Re: Internet Edge Router replacement - IPv6 route table sizeconsiderations Jeff Wheeler (Mar 10)
- RE: Internet Edge Router replacement - IPv6 route tablesizeconsiderations George Bonser (Mar 10)
- Re: Internet Edge Router replacement - IPv6 route tablesizeconsiderations Dobbins, Roland (Mar 10)
- RE: Internet Edge Router replacement - IPv6 routetablesizeconsiderations George Bonser (Mar 10)
- Re: Internet Edge Router replacement - IPv6 routetablesizeconsiderations Dobbins, Roland (Mar 10)
- Re: Internet Edge Router replacement - IPv6 route tablesizeconsiderations Owen DeLong (Mar 10)
- Re: Internet Edge Router replacement - IPv6 route tablesizeconsiderations Dobbins, Roland (Mar 10)
- Re: Internet Edge Router replacement - IPv6 route tablesizeconsiderations Owen DeLong (Mar 10)
- Re: Internet Edge Router replacement - IPv6 route tablesizeconsiderations Dobbins, Roland (Mar 11)
- Re: Internet Edge Router replacement - IPv6 route tablesizeconsiderations James Stahr (Mar 11)
- Re: Internet Edge Router replacement - IPv6 route tablesizeconsiderations Tim Durack (Mar 11)
- Re: Internet Edge Router replacement - IPv6 route tablesizeconsiderations Richard A Steenbergen (Mar 11)
- Re: Internet Edge Router replacement - IPv6 route tablesizeconsiderations Jeff Wheeler (Mar 11)
- Re: Internet Edge Router replacement - IPv6 route tablesizeconsiderations Joe Maimon (Mar 11)
- Re: Internet Edge Router replacement - IPv6 route tablesizeconsiderations Valdis . Kletnieks (Mar 11)
- Re: Internet Edge Router replacement - IPv6 route tablesizeconsiderations Joe Maimon (Mar 11)
- Re: Internet Edge Router replacement - IPv6 route tablesizeconsiderations Leo Bicknell (Mar 11)
- Re: Internet Edge Router replacement - IPv6 route tablesizeconsiderations Leo Bicknell (Mar 11)
- Re: Internet Edge Router replacement - IPv6 route tablesizeconsiderations Joe Maimon (Mar 11)
- Re: Internet Edge Router replacement - IPv6 route tablesizeconsiderations Pete Carah (Mar 11)