From: Scott Morris (swm@emanon.com)
Date: Wed Mar 14 2007 - 12:50:29 ART
No worries! Glad to help!
Scott
_____
From: Salau,Olayemi [mailto:Olayemi.Salau@southampton.gov.uk]
Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2007 11:44 AM
To: swm@emanon.com; Cisco certification
Subject: RE: IPv6 on Frame-Relay
Thanks Scott,
Your contributions are well appreciated, I think the issue bothering me is
now resolved. Within IPv6 world, IGPs use link-local addresses for next hop
as opposed to what is obtainable with IPv4. In IPv4, we never bothered about
mapping remote addresses because there is only one layer3 address, which
everyone (Static & Dynamic Routing Protocols) seems to be happy with.
Below is an excerpt in the output of ping without layer3-to-layer2
resolution for neighbour's link-local address, when RIPng is configured:-
*Mar 1 00:44:11.075: IPv6: SAS picked source 2001:1:CC1E:204::2 for
FEC0:0:0:5::5 (Serial1/0)
*Mar 1 00:44:11.083: IPv6: nexthop FE80::CE02:DFF:FEA0:0,
*Mar 1 00:44:11.083: IPV6: source 2001:1:CC1E:204::2 (local)
*Mar 1 00:44:11.087: dest FEC0:0:0:5::5 (Serial1/0)
*Mar 1 00:44:11.087: traffic class 0, flow 0x0, len 100+0, prot 58,
hops 64, originating
*Mar 1 00:44:11.091: IPv6: Encapsulation failed
*Mar 1 00:44:11.095: IPv6: Resolving next hop FE80::CE02:DFF:FEA0:0 on
interface Serial1/0.
In IPv6 domain, IGPs actually use link-local addresses as next hop, so you
have to map the link local IPv6 address to Layer2 on serial interfaces.
It feels so good to cross the last topic of my list, now I can go back and
refresh on the core topics. Cheers Scott, you're a
star!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Many Thanks
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sun Apr 01 2007 - 06:35:51 ART