Re: [Cerowrt-users] 6in4 links

[Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com>]

On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 9:45 AM, Phil Pennock <phil.pennock@spodhuis.org> wrote:
> On 2012-12-09 at 21:04 -0500, Michael Richardson wrote:
>> The problem is that the interface that is created is a /128, and it's
>> the ::2, but since it is a /128, the ::1 isn't "On-network", so the
>> static route fails.
>
> Er, a /128 means there can be no route associated with it, this is used
> typically for things like additional aliases on an interface.

Actually, we route p2p /128's via the babel protocol, and distribute
/128s via the ahcp protocol. Works great.

> To use
> this for sending traffic, you'd need a concept of "pump to far side"
> which exists for things like a tunnel, but not for stf0, which is able
> to talk to arbitrary end-points.
>
> For stf0, perhaps you want a /16 ?
>
> You might want a /127 per RFC 6164 (and RFC 6547 explicitly
> recategorised the /127s-harmful RFC as historic).  Note that a ::1 and a
> ::2 would still be on different networks for a /127.  You perhaps want
> ::2 and ::3 (or a /126 but then consider the ping-pong issues).
>
> -Phil
> _______________________________________________
> Cerowrt-users mailing list
> Cerowrt-users@lists.bufferbloat.net
> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-users



-- 
Dave Täht

Fixing bufferbloat with cerowrt: http://www.teklibre.com/cerowrt/subscribe.html