From: de Witt, Duane (duane.dewitt@siemens.com)
Date: Mon Dec 26 2005 - 15:42:27 GMT-3
Ok, so since AC is 172 in decimal, if you were asked to set the subnet
to 172 would you use 0:0:AC or AC:0:0?
I can see that they look different, but what is the technical difference
between the two?
________________________________
From: Anthony Sequeira [mailto:terry.francona@gmail.com]
Sent: 26 December 2005 08:02 PM
To: de Witt, Duane
Cc: swm@emanon.com; Cisco certification
Subject: Re: Site Local Addressing
No - they are not the same!
Be careful - FEC0:AC::4/64 configures the network portion of the address
as:
FEC0:AC:0:0
While FEC0:0:0:AC::4/64 configures the network portion of the address
as:
FEC0:0:0:AC
As you can see - these are not the same!
On 12/26/05, de Witt, Duane <duane.dewitt@siemens.com> wrote:
Sorry guys, another question:
Would FEC0:AC::4/64 be the same as fec0:0:0:ac::4/64?
If I configure it I get the interface subnet as:
FEC0:AC::4, subnet is FEC0:AC::/64 [TENTATIVE]
Thanks for you help.
-----Original Message-----
From: Scott Morris [mailto:swm@emanon.com]
Sent: 26 December 2005 05:49 PM
To: de Witt, Duane; 'Anthony Sequeira'; 'Cisco certification'
Subject: RE: Site Local Addressing
No. The "::" represents a lot of 0's. So each of your two examples,
since
they represent an ADDRESS ( e.g. 128 bits) when you expand them out
would
be
significantly different:
Fec0:0000:0000:00ac:0000:0000:0000:0004/64 is the first one
Fec0:0000:0000:0000:0000:0000:00ac:0004/64 is the second one
HTH,
Scott
-----Original Message-----
From: de Witt, Duane [mailto:duane.dewitt@siemens.com]
Sent: Monday, December 26, 2005 3:11 AM
To: Scott Morris; Anthony Sequeira; Cisco certification
Subject: RE: Site Local Addressing
Hi
Would fec0:0:0:ac::4/64 be the same as fec0::ac:4/64 ?
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
Scott Morris
Sent: 26 December 2005 06:21 AM
To: 'Anthony Sequeira'; 'Cisco certification'
Subject: RE: Site Local Addressing
Looks like it'll work to me. Just like all addresses, you can specify
either the EUI-64 "magical" addressing or specify your own host ID in
there
manually.
The site local format doesn't function any differently, just gives you
some
rules to go by. I didn't think the RFC to deprecate that had been
standardized yet, but IOS still supports it anyway, so my guess is that
it
would be fair game on the lab. *shrug*
But again, the concept of addressing will be the same whether it's the
site-local or any given/derived address range.
Scott
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto: nobody@groupstudy.com
<mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com> ] On Behalf Of
Anthony Sequeira
Sent: Sunday, December 25, 2005 1:40 PM
To: Cisco certification
Subject: Site Local Addressing
Hi everyone!
Couple of questions on this topic. . .
First please if you would do not bother to point out that this
feature
is deprecated I am completely aware of that. . .
1) In all of the documentation I have found I always encounter
this
statement "A site local unicast address is an IPv6 unicast address that
uses
the prefix range FEC0::/10 and concatenates the subnet identifier with
the
interface ID in the EUI-64 format." I find myself a bit
troubled/confused by
this statement. I assume that I should not read too much into the word
concatenates here. It would seem from the diagram that they just mean
that
the Subnet ID is next to the interface ID.
2) Is this example correct, therefore? I want to create a
Site-Local
address with the Subnet ID of AC. Correct command is: ipv6 address
FEC0:0:0:AC::/64 eui-64 Is it that simple?
3) How about this one? Create a site-local address and use a Subnet
ID
of AC and an interface ID of 4. I guess the correct thing to do is keep
your
Interface ID at 64 bits.so we do this: ipv6 address fec0:0:0:ac::4/64
Everyone like?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Mon Jan 09 2006 - 07:07:52 GMT-3