nanog mailing list archives
Re: subnet prefix length > 64 breaks IPv6?
From: Valdis.Kletnieks () vt edu
Date: Tue, 27 Dec 2011 18:35:42 -0500
On Wed, 28 Dec 2011 04:58:19 +0530, Glen Kent said:
I had assumed that nodes derive their link local address from the Route Advertisements. They derive their least significant 64 bytes from their MACs and the most significant 64 from the prefix announced in the RAs.
No, on Ethernet-ish networks the link-local is derived from an 'fe80::' and the MAC.
Attachment:
_bin
Description:
Current thread:
- Re: subnet prefix length > 64 breaks IPv6?, (continued)
- Re: subnet prefix length > 64 breaks IPv6? sthaug (Dec 23)
- Re: subnet prefix length > 64 breaks IPv6? Glen Kent (Dec 24)
- Re: subnet prefix length > 64 breaks IPv6? Karl Auer (Dec 24)
- Re: subnet prefix length > 64 breaks IPv6? Alexandru Petrescu (Dec 24)
- Re: subnet prefix length > 64 breaks IPv6? Glen Kent (Dec 24)
- Re: subnet prefix length > 64 breaks IPv6? Jonathan Lassoff (Dec 24)
- Re: subnet prefix length > 64 breaks IPv6? Glen Kent (Dec 24)
- Re: subnet prefix length > 64 breaks IPv6? sthaug (Dec 23)
- Re: subnet prefix length > 64 breaks IPv6? Sven Olaf Kamphuis (Dec 24)
- Re: subnet prefix length > 64 breaks IPv6? Glen Kent (Dec 26)
- Re: subnet prefix length > 64 breaks IPv6? Glen Kent (Dec 27)
- Re: subnet prefix length > 64 breaks IPv6? Valdis . Kletnieks (Dec 27)
- Re: subnet prefix length > 64 breaks IPv6? Joel Maslak (Dec 27)
- Re: subnet prefix length > 64 breaks IPv6? Chuck Anderson (Dec 27)
- Re: subnet prefix length > 64 breaks IPv6? Glen Kent (Dec 25)
- Re: subnet prefix length > 64 breaks IPv6? sthaug (Dec 25)
- Re: subnet prefix length > 64 breaks IPv6? Ray Soucy (Dec 28)
- Re: subnet prefix length > 64 breaks IPv6? Alexandru Petrescu (Dec 29)
- Re: subnet prefix length > 64 breaks IPv6? sthaug (Dec 28)
- Re: subnet prefix length > 64 breaks IPv6? Glen Kent (Dec 28)