[ipv6-wg] IPv6 on P2P links

The major problem I can assume happen when using only link local is the
issue of replacing hardware.
When you replace the cards on the routers it will require you to change
the internal routing protocol (IS-IS \ OSPF).

Another issue is debugging - when using trace route - all you will see
is link-local addresses which make it very difficult to debug issues.

We are configuring all our P2P links with /64 prefix on each link.
This is not idle and very wasteful way, but it's the only solution to
not interfere with RFCs and standards. 
Also - this is the only way to be multi vendors prepared, be ready for
future to come with new IPv6 applications and products.

MHO,
Elad

-----Original Message-----
From: ipv6-wg-admin at ripe.net [mailto:ipv6-wg-admin at ripe.net] On Behalf
Of Jasper Jans
Sent: Thursday, May 26, 2011 11:08 AM
To: ipv6-wg at ripe.net
Subject: [ipv6-wg] IPv6 on P2P links

Can anyone give me some real world experience with IPv6 numbering on P2P
links in their network?

I've seen the recommendations swing from '/64' to '/127 if your
equipment can handle it' and even to 'do not assign anything at all just
use link-local' and access your devices over the loopback which your IGP
will distribute.

The last option seems interesting to me from a IP assignment point of
few. It safes me having to allocate a block for this part of the
infrastructure. I'm just wondering if in the long run it will not make
life harder.

Jasper


Op dit e-mailbericht is een disclaimer van toepassing, welke te vinden
is op http://www.espritxb.nl/disclaimer



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: </ripe/mail/archives/ipv6-wg/attachments/20110526/7559c70f/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: imp_bezeqint_Toft0.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 21176 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: </ripe/mail/archives/ipv6-wg/attachments/20110526/7559c70f/attachment.jpg>