nanog mailing list archives
Re: google ipv6 routes via cogent
From: Theodore Baschak <theodore () ciscodude net>
Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2017 21:12:40 -0600
My own experience was that I tried to use the 2000::/3 route initially and that was fine with static routes in my lab, but once dynamic routing protocols were introduced, ::/0 was the only thing recognized as "default" to propagate or not with default-route statements in BGP and OSPF. That may vary from platform to platform, however the ones I played with all exhibited this behaviour. Theodore Baschak - AS395089 - Hextet Systems https://ciscodude.net/ - https://hextet.systems/ http://mbix.ca/ On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 8:01 PM, Dennis Bohn <bohn () adelphi edu> wrote:
Interesting question whether 2000::/3 or ::/0 is the better default route. From what I can tell (as OP indicated) most are using ::/0. (I should probably add for those who have not been running V6 for long that for the forseeble future 2000::/3 is the extent of the V6 allocation, the rest being held back for future use. Which is why that could be a default.) Is there any case where 2000::/3 would hurt one? One person mentioned something like 64:ff9b::/96, which per http://www.iana.org/assignments/iana-ipv6-special- registry/iana-ipv6-special-registry.xhtml, is the v4 to v6 translator net. Does anyone actually use that? best, dennis Dennis Bohn Manager of Network and Systems (ret) Adelphi University bohn () adelphi edu On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 12:20 PM, Baldur Norddahl < baldur.norddahl () gmail com> wrote:Shouldn't that be 2000::/3 ? Den 2. mar. 2017 17.06 skrev "Aaron Gould" <aaron1 () gvtc com>: Correction... ::/0 is what I learn from those 3 :)
Current thread:
- Re: google ipv6 routes via cogent, (continued)
- Re: google ipv6 routes via cogent Patrick W. Gilmore (Mar 03)
- Re: google ipv6 routes via cogent Job Snijders (Mar 03)
- Re: google ipv6 routes via cogent Jeremy Austin (Mar 03)
- Re: google ipv6 routes via cogent Patrick W. Gilmore (Mar 04)
- Re: google ipv6 routes via cogent Jared Mauch (Mar 02)
- Re: google ipv6 routes via cogent joel jaeggli (Mar 07)
- Re: google ipv6 routes via cogent Chuck Anderson (Mar 02)
- Re: google ipv6 routes via cogent Hunter Fuller (Mar 02)
- Message not available
- Message not available
- Re: google ipv6 routes via cogent Baldur Norddahl (Mar 04)
- Re: google ipv6 routes via cogent Dennis Bohn (Mar 02)
- Re: google ipv6 routes via cogent Theodore Baschak (Mar 02)
- Re: google ipv6 routes via cogent Christopher Morrow (Mar 02)
- Re: google ipv6 routes via cogent Marty Strong via NANOG (Mar 08)
- Re: google ipv6 routes via cogent Alarig Le Lay (Mar 08)