From: Jack Flash (jack.flash@inbox.com)
Date: Tue Jan 15 2008 - 23:49:34 ARST
Hmmm, a quick look at google suggests no.
Back to the books for me.
-----Original Message-----
From: Jack Flash [mailto:jack.flash@inbox.com]
Sent: 16 January 2008 01:45
To: 'Mick Vaites'; 'ccielab@groupstudy.com'
Subject: RE: IPv6 Frame-relay map's
Aren't broadcasts done away with in IPV6?
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of Mick
Vaites
Sent: 15 January 2008 00:25
To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: IPv6 Frame-relay map's
Hi all,
I am puzzling over which is correct and which is not.
It is necessary to put in L2 / L3 mappings for both the actual IPv6
addressing as well as the lnik local addresses but which gets the broadcast
statement?
Senario: two routers connected for IPv6, R1 and R5 over a frame-relay cloud,
network is 2001:cc1e:5:15::x/64 and the DLCI's are 105 and 501 respectively.
This are the possible snippets for R1. (apologies for any obvious typos).
I am wondering which is right
!R1
Interface Serial 1/0
ipv6 address 2001:cc1e:5:15::1/64
ipv6 address fe80::1 link-local
frame-relay map ipv6 fe80::5 105 broadcast <---- broadcast on the
link-local
frame-relay map ipv6 2001:cc1e:5:15::5 105
or
!R1
Interface Serial 1/0
ipv6 address 2001:cc1e:5:15::1/64
ipv6 address fe80::1 link-local
frame-relay map ipv6 fe80::5 105
frame-relay map ipv6 2001:cc1e:5:15::5 105 broadcast <----- broadcast on
the main IP
I have tried both of these senarios and both work okay ?
Best regards
Mick
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri Feb 01 2008 - 10:37:59 ARST