nanog mailing list archives
Re: IPv6 routing /48s
From: Perry Lorier <perry () coders net>
Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2008 10:13:07 +1300
The big problem is when you have a route to them, but they don't have a route back. You don't get destination unreachables, but instead get timeouts, and pain, and misery (btdt). :(Having no route is not a problem, you should get a destination unreachable directly and all is fine because IPv4 should be used as a fallback.
Current thread:
- Re: IPv6 routing /48s, (continued)
- Re: IPv6 routing /48s Owen DeLong (Nov 17)
- Re: IPv6 routing /48s Frank Habicht (Nov 18)
- Re: IPv6 routing /48s Owen DeLong (Nov 17)
- Re: IPv6 routing /48s Nathan Ward (Nov 17)
- Re: IPv6 routing /48s Joe Maimon (Nov 18)
- Re: IPv6 routing /48s Christopher Morrow (Nov 18)
- Re: IPv6 routing /48s Michael Sinatra (Nov 18)
- Re: IPv6 routing /48s Joel Jaeggli (Nov 18)
- Re: IPv6 routing /48s Christopher Morrow (Nov 18)
- Re: IPv6 routing /48s Jack Bates (Nov 18)
- Re: IPv6 routing /48s Jeroen Massar (Nov 18)
- Re: IPv6 routing /48s Perry Lorier (Nov 18)
- Re: IPv6 routing /48s Michael Sinatra (Nov 18)
- Re: IPv6 routing /48s Florian Weimer (Nov 19)
- Re: IPv6 routing /48s Nathan Ward (Nov 19)
- Re: IPv6 routing /48s Mohacsi Janos (Nov 20)
- Re: IPv6 routing /48s Florian Weimer (Nov 21)
- Re: IPv6 routing /48s Jack Bates (Nov 21)
- RE: IPv6 routing /48s Tony Hain (Nov 25)
- Re: IPv6 routing /48s Niels Bakker (Nov 25)
- Re: IPv6 routing /48s Mark Andrews (Nov 25)
- Re: IPv6 routing /48s Niels Bakker (Nov 25)