From: ccie2be (ccie2be@nyc.rr.com)
Date: Tue Apr 19 2005 - 19:18:30 GMT-3
Hi Marvin,
Thanks for getting back to me.
That part I understand. What I don't understand is why pings work before a
map to remote link local address is configured.
I would think the pings would fail but they don't.
Tim
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
marvin greenlee
Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2005 6:05 PM
To: 'ccie2be'; Group Study
Subject: RE: The IE presentation on IPv6 [bcc][faked-from]
Take a look at the routing table for routes learned. Notice that routes are
"via" a link local address. Without knowing how to reach that link local
address, the router cannot get to the next hop.
****
r1#show ipv6 route ospf
IPv6 Routing Table - 7 entries
Codes: C - Connected, L - Local, S - Static, R - RIP, B - BGP
U - Per-user Static route
I1 - ISIS L1, I2 - ISIS L2, IA - ISIS interarea, IS - ISIS summary
O - OSPF intra, OI - OSPF inter, OE1 - OSPF ext 1, OE2 - OSPF ext 2
ON1 - OSPF NSSA ext 1, ON2 - OSPF NSSA ext 2
O 2005:13::/64 [110/65]
via FE80::210:7BFF:FEA3:A700, Serial0/0
****
Marvin Greenlee, CCIE#12237, CCSI# 30483
Network Learning Inc
marvin@ccbootcamp.com
www.ccbootcamp.com (Cisco Training)
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
ccie2be
Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2005 2:51 PM
To: Group Study
Subject: The IE presentation on IPv6 [bcc][faked-from]
Importance: Low
Hi guys,
I just saw the excellent IE presentation on IPv6 earlier today. I'm glad I
did. I think Brian M. did a great job of comparing how ipv4 and ipv6 works.
For anyone who isn't that experienced with ipv6 and hasn't seen this
presentation, I strongly recommend listening to this presentation.
However, after thinking about what I saw in this presentation, I'm confused
about one thing.
Did anyone notice that after the f/r interfaces were assigned an ipv6
address and map statements to the remote global unicast addresses were
added, pings between the routers were successful.
But, a little later on, we were shown why over nbma networks, 1 map
statement to each remote router wasn't enough. We needed to add a second
map statement to the remote link-local address so that L3 to L2 address
resolution could be done. OK, that makes sense.
However, before the map statements were added for the link-local address,
pings worked.
Why is that?
Doesn't that seem strange? Why would pings work when routing over the f/r
interfaces doesn't work without the 2nd map statements?
Any insight would be greatly appreciated.
TIA, Tim
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Tue May 03 2005 - 07:55:01 GMT-3