[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: What is wrong



Hello,

Pepo a écrit :

I have an error, mi LAN is something like:

PC-a
fec0:2006:2007::a/125
   |
fec0:2006:2007::9/125
routerA
fec0:2006:2007:333::2/126
   |
   |
fec0:2006:2007:333::1/126
routerB
fec0:2006:2007::1/125
   |
fec0:2006:2007::2/125
PC-b

And I configure:
(routerA)
ip link set eth0 up
ip link set eth1 up
ip addr add fec0:2006:2007::9/125 dev eth0
ip addr add fec0:2006:2007:333::2/126 dev eth1
ip -6 route add fec0:2006:2007::/125 dev eth1 metric 1

(routerB)
ip link set eth0 up
ip link set eth1 up
ip addr add fec0:2006:2007::1/125 dev eth0
ip addr add fec0:2006:2007:333::1/126 dev eth1
ip -6 route add fec0:2006:2007::8/125 dev eth1 metric 1

But I can "ping" just from fec0:2006:2007:333::1 to fec0:2006:2007:333::2 and nothing more. So, what's wrong?

Your routes assume that the destinations are directly reachable on the ethernet link, which is wrong : the destinations are behind a gateway. Try :

(routerA)
ip -6 route add fec0:2006:2007::/125 via fec0:2006:2007:333::1

(routerB)
ip -6 route add fec0:2006:2007::8/125 via fec0:2006:2007:333::2

Notes :
1) IPv6 gives plenty of address space, why not use standard /64 prefix lengths for each subnet ?

2) The fec0::/10 "site local addresses" have been deprecated in RFC3879 and replaced with fc00::/7 "unique local unicast addresses" in RFC4193.

3) Unlike IPv4, "all zeroes" and "all ones" addresses have no special meaning and are valid IPv6 host addresses, so you do not have to reserve the first and last addresses in a subnet.



Reply to: