Re: using "reserved" IPv6 space

[-Hammer- <bhmccie () gmail com>]

I think they would. I'm just a bit too new to this. Thanks.

-Hammer-

"I was a normal American nerd"
-Jack Herer



On 7/13/2012 10:05 AM, TJ wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 10:38 AM, -Hammer- <bhmccie () gmail com 
> <mailto:bhmccie () gmail com>> wrote:
>
>     OK. I'm pretty sure I'm gonna get some flak for this but I'll
>     share this question and it's background anyway. Please be gentle.
>
>     In the past, with IPv4, we have used reserved or "non-routable"
>     space Internally in production for segments that won't be seen
>     anywhere else. Examples? A sync VLAN for some FWs to share state.
>     An IBGP link between routers that will never be seen or
>     advertised. In those cases, we have often used 192.0.2.0/24
>     <http://192.0.2.0/24>. It's reserved and never used and even if it
>     did get used one day we aren't "routing" it internally. It's just
>     on segments where we need some L3 that will never be seen.
>
>     On to IPv6
>
>     I was considering taking the same approach. Maybe using 0100::/8
>     or 1000::/4 or A000::/3 as a space for this.
>
>
>
> Would using "just" Link Locals not be sufficient?
> /(Failing that, as others noted, ULAs are the next "right" answer ... )/
> /
> /
> /TJ