Re: IPv6 Lo. for 6PE/6VPE

[Owen DeLong <owen () delong com>]

If it does, that's bad... You should never see IPv4 mapped addresses on the wire.
They should only be an internal representation of an IPv4 packet within the host.

Owen

On Jun 15, 2012, at 3:52 AM, Nagendra Kumar (naikumar) wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Per my understanding, it is not required to have ipv6 address in loopback intf on all P routers inorder to have 6PE 
> work. If I remember it correctly, P router will use ::FFFF::<ipv4-addr> while originating ICMPv6 error message.
>
> -Nagendra
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Daniel Roesen [mailto:dr () cluenet de] 
> Sent: Friday, June 15, 2012 4:02 PM
> To: nanog () nanog org
> Subject: Re: IPv6 Lo. for 6PE/6VPE
>
> On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 11:56:05AM +0200, mohamed Osama Saad Abo sree wrote:
> > I was just wondering , while I'm planning my network to support 
> > 6PE/6VPE why should i assign an IPv6 for Loopbacks?
> >
> > Maybe it's needed for Point-Point links or external interfaces between 
> > my peers, but anyone here know why i should assign IPv6 for all my 
> > Routers inside my ISP if we will run PE/6VPE not dual stack.
>
> Otherwise the intermediate P devices do not have an address to source
> ICMPv6 "hop count exceeded" error replies => traceroute doesn't work properly.
>
> Best regards,
> Daniel
>
> --
> CLUE-RIPE -- Jabber: dr () cluenet de -- dr@IRCnet -- PGP: 0xA85C8AA0