Re: using "reserved" IPv6 space

["Fred Baker (fred)" <fred () cisco com>]

On Jul 13, 2012, at 8:05 AM, TJ wrote:

> On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 10:38 AM, -Hammer- <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. 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?

If they're on the same link, of course. My understanding of the question said "they're not on the same link".

> *(Failing that, as others noted, ULAs are the next "right" answer ... )*
> *
> *
> /TJ