6bone to 6to4

[Kurt D. Zeilenga]

Kristoff,

I am not sure what the policy is for propagating 2002::/16 routes
on the 6bone.  I would suspect that 2002::/16 routes should only
be exchanged between ASs under mutual agreement as to avoid
perverse routing situations.  There are clearly areas on the
6bone which have no route to 2002::/16.  Your upstream 6bone
provider may not have a route to 2002::/16 and hence not able
to route packets back to you (unless you advertise a 2002::/16
route to them (with permission)).

Note that propagation of 2002: with prefixes longer than 16 on
the 6bone is prohibited as this would saturate the IPv6 routing
tables.

You're welcomed to experiment with ping/traceroute to our IPv6
router:
  2002:c690:ce31::1
  3ffe:1900:3::2

[but don't use as a default router, we don't have the bandwidth].

At 12:44 PM 1/23/01 +0100, Kristoff Bonne wrote:
>Greetings,
>
>On Mon, 22 Jan 2001, Kurt D. Zeilenga wrote:
>>> Besides 6bone (BGP) connectivity, I am also playing with the 6to4
>>> encapsulation.
>>> I my router has IP-address 195.13.17.26, I use the block of
>IP-addresses 
>>> 2002:C30D:111A/48. (which should be correct).
>>> I also set up a static route at my router, that routes traffic to
>>> 2002::/16 to the 6-to-4 tunnel. (The rest used the routing-info that is
>>> received via BGP4+).
>
>>> This seams to work for hosts that have a IPv6-address in my
>>> 6bone-range (for all traffic), but a hosts that only has a 6to4-type
>>> address can only reach other hosts that have a 6to4 address.
>> Do they have a route to the 6BONE?
>Yep.
>This is my config:
>- A cisco router (25xx) which both BGP 4+ to belnet (and from-there-on the
>6bone) and a 6to4-interface. (I used to config posted by Erik Rietberg in
>this list earlier this week).
>- Routing static route for 2002::/16 to tunnel1 (6to4). For the rest, it
>'falls back' to the BGP 4+ routing.
>- On the LAN-interface, both the 6bone address-range and 2002-range. Only
>the 6bone-range (and site-local) is announced via RP.
>- On the lan: one linux-box (which has a 6bone-address learned via RP from
>the router) and one OpenBSD-box with a 2002-address (configured
>statically) and default gateway set statiscally to router (link-local
>address).
>
>Result:
>- linux-box (hence, 6bone-address) can reach everything.
>A ping6 to a remote 2002-address (e.g. ipv6-router.cisco.com or
>6to4.ipv6.microsoft.com) is now faster then before. (which proves that the
>shortcut for the 2002-address static-route is used).
>- OpenBSD-box (hence, 2002-address) can reach the other 2002-addresses,
>but not the 6bone-addresses.
>
>To me, it looks like the 6bone-hosts don't know the return-path to my
>2002-address.
>
>As a test, I've also added my 2002-addresses in my BGP-4+ announcements,
>and now I can reach SOME 6bone-addresses (like www.6bone.net and
>www.ipv6.surfnet.nl), but others do not reply (like www.belnet.be or
>www.kame.net).
>
>Is it possible there any some filters somewhere on the BGP-4+
>announcements? Can anybody check their B GP 4+ routing-table for AS6774?
>
>
>What I found strange that (in my BGP4+ routing-table) I did found the
>follwing entry:
>*> 2002::/16        3FFE:608:2:2::10           0 2611 3257 4697 1251 109 i
>
>So, there DOES is a 'universal' 6bone to 6to4 gateway???
>
>
>Cheerio! Kr. Bonne.
>-- 
>KB905-RIPE                                       Belgacom  IP networking
>(c=be,a=rtt,p=belgacomgroup,s=Bonne,g=Kristoff)  Internet, IP and IP/VPN
>kristoff.bonne@skypro.be                         Faxbox :  +32 2 2435122