who gets a /32 [Re: IPV6 renumbering painless?]

Mon Nov 29 18:50:10 UTC 2004

Right... Well... The point of the loopback thingy was that you don't
renumber the loopback.  The address assigned to the loopback is used
as the session endpoint identifier, while, the address assigned to
the network interface is used as the routing endpoint identifier.  So,
BGP takes care of deailing with the consequences of renumbering the
routing endpoint identifier, and, lo0 remains a consistent session endpoint
identifier.

This will not scale, but, it does work (e.g. anycast).

Owen

--On Monday, November 29, 2004 1:39 PM -0500 Joe Abley <jabley at isc.org> 
wrote:

>
> On 29 Nov 2004, at 13:36, Owen DeLong wrote:
>
>> ifconfig le0:1 <newaddr> netmask <newmask>
>>
>> YMMV depending on your operating system.
>
> If the old address is removed, then TCP sessions established with the old
> address as an endpoint will break; hence plumbing TCP sessions to
> loopback addresses is not a solution to TCP survival over renumbering
> attempts.
>
> That was my point.
>
>> --On Monday, November 29, 2004 1:28 PM -0500 Joe Abley
>> <jabley at isc.org> wrote:
>>
>>> On 29 Nov 2004, at 10:58, Andre Oppermann wrote:
>>>
>>>> You can solve the renumber thingie by having all TCP connecting
>>>> to/from
>>>> an official IP on the loopback interface.  Then the routing code
>>>> could
>>>> do its work and route the packets through some some other or
>>>> renumbered
>>>> interface.
>>>
>>> So how do you renumber the loopback interface?
>

-- 
If it wasn't crypto-signed, it probably didn't come from me.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 186 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20041129/f05db957/attachment.sig>