Re: ipv6 tunnel interface encaps

From: Petr Lapukhov (petr@internetworkexpert.com)
Date: Tue Jul 15 2008 - 11:48:30 ART


GRE was originally designed as multiprotocol encapsulation. Therefore, it
can carry IPv6, IPv4, IPX (you name it) etc on the same tunnel, e.g.
interface Tunnel0
 ip address 23.23.23.3 255.255.255.0
 ipv6 address 2001::3/64
 ipx network 100
 tunnel source Loopback0
 tunnel destination 150.1.2.2

On contrary, 6in4 tunnels are exclusively for IPv6 - they have the smallest
overhead possible, and based on that factor are more efficient for IPv6
tunneling than "generic" GRE tunnels.

HTH

-- 
Petr Lapukhov, CCIE #16379 (R&S/Security/SP/Voice)
petr@internetworkexpert.com

Internetwork Expert, Inc. http://www.InternetworkExpert.com Toll Free: 877-224-8987 Outside US: 775-826-4344 Online Community: http://www.IEOC.com CCIE Blog: http://blog.internetworkexpert.com

2008/7/15 Igor Manassypov <imanassypov@rogers.com>:

> any extra functionality, may be? > > Mohammed Naviwala <monavy@gmail.com> wrote: Hi > > basically gre has more overheads than ipv6ip tunnell so the ipv6 tunell is > preferred.... > > experts......more light on this please... > > > On 7/15/08, Igor Manassypov <imanassypov@rogers.com> wrote: Guys, > > Whats the principal difference between GRE and ipv6 tunnel encapsulations? > On the surface both can do the same thing... > > > Thanks! > > > _______________________________________________________________________ > Subscription information may be found at: > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html > > > > > > > > > -- > Best Regards > > Mohammed Abdul Razzaq > > > 'A bird sitting on the branch of a tree is not afraid of the branch > breaking; bcoz the bird trusts not the branch but its own wings. BELIEVE IN > URSELF' > > > _______________________________________________________________________ > Subscription information may be found at: > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Mon Aug 04 2008 - 06:11:55 ART