From: Anand Singh \(anandksi\) (anandksi@cisco.com)
Date: Wed May 18 2005 - 13:09:13 GMT-3
I guess more specific answer to that may be in IPv6 RFC. In general, the
global addresses are not a requirement for routing to work (except in
some cases like OSPF virtual link). Why to waste a global address if its
not a reqmt..that may be one reason. Ipv6 packets on the link are
forwarded with source/destination as link local addresses.
Thanks
-Anand
-> -----Original Message-----
-> From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com]
-> On Behalf Of Lee Donald
-> Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2005 8:59 AM
-> To: ccie2be; Lee Donald; ccielab@groupstudy.com
-> Subject: RE: IPV6 Link Local FE80
->
-> Thanks Tim, but that's the bit I already know.
->
-> I want to know why it chooses the link local address as
-> oppose to the outside global address.
->
-> Regards
->
-> Lee.
->
->
->
-> -----Original Message-----
-> From: ccie2be [mailto:ccie2be@nyc.rr.com]
-> Sent: 18 May 2005 16:48
-> To: 'Lee Donald'; ccielab@groupstudy.com
-> Subject: RE: IPV6 Link Local FE80
->
-> Hey Lee,
->
-> I'll take a shot at this.
->
-> First, this requirement isn't specific to rip, I believe it
-> applies to all
-> ipv6 routing protocols except BGP. Also, I think this
-> applies to all nbma media except isdn.
->
-> Here's how I understand it.
->
-> Assume r1 and r2 are connected via f/r and are running an
-> ipv6 based routing protocol, take your pick.
->
-> When an ipv6 IGP sends out updates or LSA's or Hello's, by
-> default, the source ipv6 of the update is the link-local
-> address. Therefore, for the receiving rtr to be able to
-> respond, it uses the link-local address. If you don't have a
-> static mapping you'll get an encap failed message.
->
-> HTH, Tim
->
->
-> -----Original Message-----
-> From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com]
-> On Behalf Of Lee Donald
-> Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2005 11:26 AM
-> To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
-> Subject: IPV6 Link Local FE80
->
-> Can anybody tell me why on frame-relay, using RIPng for
-> instance does the rip route in the table point towards the
-> link local of the originating router? Shouldn't this route
-> come from the global address of the originating router?
-> I know how to get it working over frame, by having a
-> frame-map to the global and then a frame map to the link
-> local of the remote but I would like to know why?
->
-> Any takers?
->
-> Thanks in advance.
->
-> Lee.
->
-> _____________________________________________________________
-> __________
-> Subscription information may be found at:
-> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
->
-> _____________________________________________________________
-> __________
-> Subscription information may be found at:
-> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
->
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri Jun 03 2005 - 10:11:58 GMT-3