Designing IPv6 network guidelines?

[Pekka Savola]

On Wed, 28 Feb 2001 itojun@iijlab.net wrote:
> > * Is routing between 6bone and production addresses in use/reliable yet?
> >Does 6to4 work in practise?  Are there 6to4 prefixes being announced to
> >the net at large? (Looking for a setup where IPv6 enabled LAN segments
> >would connect via ipv6 enabled gateways to a central IPv6 router, from
> >which would provide the connectivity)
>
> 	to stabilize, try to remove tunnels and move to IPv6 over leased
> 	line (or IPv4/v6 dual stack connectivity over leased line).  it works
> 	for me.

Tunnels between client boxes (the first hop) has some problems, but I
can't see too many with tunneling over IPv4 between the sites, rather than
having to build these with ATM PVC's or the like (for the ease, and not
having to stick to ATM technology).

Or are there some problems with this approach?

> >1) Some RFC recommended using site-local addresses for point to point
> >links.  Won't this break traceroute?
>
> 	you don't even need site-locals for point to point links.  they just
> 	work fine with link-local address.  all routing protocols should run
> 	fine with p2p with link-local address only.

Routing protocols, yes.  But if you want to bind e.g. EBGP to the
interface address rather than loopback, this might be a problem.

Also, why _would_ traceroute work?  If the link local address of a P-t-P
link were to use private addresses, you couldn't trace through the
internet.

-- 
Pekka Savola                  "Tell me of difficulties surmounted,
Netcore Oy                    not those you stumble over and fall"
Systems. Networks. Security.   -- Robert Jordan: A Crown of Swords