From: Scott Morris (swm@emanon.com)
Date: Wed Jun 01 2005 - 23:47:31 GMT-3
Ok. So you gave yourself reachability there somehow. And presumably you
had basic connectivity in order to reach that one peer. (neighbor with the
ipv6 address)
So that's the guy you're discussing IPv6 stuff with.
Now, I haven't got a clue how the Brian's labs are setup, although I'm sure
they're mentally abusive! :) Beyond that though, I would expect that you
have the same BGP problems we have in IPv4. Since your peer is in your AS,
what does that tell you? The next hop isn't going to change, so wherever
they point you for reachable routes, you need to know how to get there...
Your original post though showed your peer in ipv6 address family as 1.1.1.1
which is an IPv4 address. :)
Scott
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of John
Matus
Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2005 10:19 PM
To: swm@emanon.com; ccie2be@nyc.rr.com; ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: RE: ipv6 for bgp
ok, but why- after i typed in the config below - did i then see the ipv6
address in the running config, even tho i did not enter it??? it was as
though there was some sort of ipv6 negotiation/discovery process involved in
this.....
(preface/post-face: this was an IE lab. i was configuring ipv6 to peer w/
a backbone router of which i had no control over. the running config of my
router had the ipv6 mapping as though i entered it manually doing:
router bgp 100
nei 1.2.3.5 remote 100
address-fam ipv6
nei xxxx.xxxx.xxxx.xxxx:: remote 100
>From: "Scott Morris" <swm@emanon.com>
>Reply-To: <swm@emanon.com>
>To: "'John Matus'"
><john_matus@hotmail.com>,<ccie2be@nyc.rr.com>,<ccielab@groupstudy.com>
>Subject: RE: ipv6 for bgp
>Date: Wed, 1 Jun 2005 21:11:49 -0400
>
>But on the other hand, when you try to reach BGP across the network
>will it work? When the next hop is seen as an IPv4 address, doesn't
>that kinda mess things up?
>
>I can see it, I just can't get there! ;)
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
>John Matus
>Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2005 8:22 PM
>To: swm@emanon.com; ccie2be@nyc.rr.com; ccielab@groupstudy.com
>Subject: RE: ipv6 for bgp
>
>well scott,
>if i was asked to peer 2 router with ipv6 bgp, would i have fulfilled
>that task per my example below?
>when i do a "sh bgp ipv6 nei sum" i do get a neighbor 1.1.1.1, and when
>i
>
>check the running config i've got the ipv6 address added to my bgp
>process.............
>
> >From: "Scott Morris" <swm@emanon.com>
> >Reply-To: <swm@emanon.com>
> >To: "'ccie2be'" <ccie2be@nyc.rr.com>,"'John Matus'"
> ><john_matus@hotmail.com>,<ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> >Subject: RE: ipv6 for bgp
> >Date: Wed, 1 Jun 2005 20:04:18 -0400
> >
> >Not quite. An address family simply says "what are we going to talk
> >about?"
> >
> >Don't confuse BGP with IP routing protocols. BGP is an application
> >that discusses IP routes. By default it talks about IPv4 routes
> >'cause that's what it was created for. However, it also discusses
> >other things like VPNv4, Multicast and IPv6. The application is
> >still the
>application.
> >
> >So in your example there, you are peering two IPv4 devices with an
> >IPv4 TCP application to talk about IPv6 routes. You may now know
> >where these routes are but have nowhere to use them!
> >
> >It's kinda like you and I discussing some entertaining words in Japanese.
> >While it may be very nice that we now know a few choice words, it's
> >not like either of us has any place to actually use that knowledge
> >(at least in my case!).
> >
> >HTH,
> >
> >Scott
> >
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf
> >Of ccie2be
> >Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2005 6:35 PM
> >To: 'John Matus'; ccielab@groupstudy.com
> >Subject: RE: ipv6 for bgp
> >
> >What's the physical link over which BGP is trying to peer?
> >
> >It does make a difference.
> >
> >Tim
> >
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf
> >Of John Matus
> >Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2005 6:03 PM
> >To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> >Subject: ipv6 for bgp
> >
> >just wondering if my observations were correct..........
> >if you have a peer that runs both ipv4 and ipv6 and you do the following:
> >
> >router bgp 100
> >neighbor 1.1.1.1 remote 100
> >address-family ipv6
> >neighbor 1.1.1.1 activate
> >
> >the result is that both ipv4 and ipv6 adjacencies come up.
> >
> >i checked the running config after and found the ipv6 address mapping
> >in the
> >
> >config, but when i do a "show bgp ipv6 neighbor" it does not show the
> >ipv6 address of the remote host, hence my question............
> >
> >_________________________________________________________________
> >On the road to retirement? Check out MSN Life Events for advice on
> >how to get there!
> >http://lifeevents.msn.com/category.aspx?cid=Retirement
> >
> >_____________________________________________________________________
> >__ 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
> >
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>Dont just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search!
>http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/
>
>_______________________________________________________________________
>Subscription information may be found at:
>http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Wed Jul 06 2005 - 14:43:40 GMT-3