Re: google ipv6 routes via cogent

[Theodore Baschak <theodore () ciscodude net>]

My own experience was that I tried to use the 2000::/3 route initially and
that was fine with static routes in my lab, but once dynamic routing
protocols were introduced, ::/0 was the only thing recognized as "default"
to propagate or not with default-route statements in BGP and OSPF.

That may vary from platform to platform, however the ones I played with all
exhibited this behaviour.


Theodore Baschak - AS395089 - Hextet Systems
https://ciscodude.net/ - https://hextet.systems/
http://mbix.ca/


On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 8:01 PM, Dennis Bohn <bohn () adelphi edu> wrote:

> Interesting question whether 2000::/3 or ::/0 is the better default route.
> From what I can tell (as OP indicated) most are using ::/0. (I should
> probably add for those who have not been running V6 for long that for the
> forseeble future 2000::/3 is the extent of the V6 allocation, the rest
> being held back for future use. Which is why that could be a default.) Is
> there any case where 2000::/3 would hurt one? One person mentioned
> something like 64:ff9b::/96, which per
> http://www.iana.org/assignments/iana-ipv6-special-
> registry/iana-ipv6-special-registry.xhtml,
> is the v4 to v6 translator net. Does anyone actually use that?
> best,
> dennis
>
> Dennis Bohn
> Manager of Network and Systems (ret)
> Adelphi University
> bohn () adelphi edu
>
>
> On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 12:20 PM, Baldur Norddahl <
> baldur.norddahl () gmail com>
> wrote:
>
> > Shouldn't that be 2000::/3 ?
> >
> > Den 2. mar. 2017 17.06 skrev "Aaron Gould" <aaron1 () gvtc com>:
> >
> > Correction...  ::/0 is what I learn from those 3     :)