Re: routing problems with 6to4 IPv6?

[Remco van de Meent <remco@vandemeent.net>]

Craig Small wrote:
> Generally 'routers' cannot use ipv6 default routes.  When they (those
> wacky kernel people) mean routers, I think they mean a host with more
> than one interface.

You mean Linux 'routers' in that case I assume... E.g. Cisco has no
problems whatsoever with a ::/0 route.

> You're not the first person to get caught by this, as it says at
> http://people.debian.org/~csmall/ipv6/setup.html
> 
>  Default routes bounce packets. Having a default route in Linux for
>  IPv6 can often lead to severe hair loss as you tear whatever is
>  remaining out. For reasons best left to the kernel hackers, using
>  default routes just doesn't work right (ok you may be lucky). Use
>  2000::0/3 instead.
> 
> Very annoying and it gives very wierd results.

If you use radvd for stateless autoconfiguration, you'll get a ::/0
route to the link-local address of the router issuing the RAs. I'm not
entirely sure though whether that's correct and expected behaviour.

cheers,
Remco.