Ipv6 addressing for Core network
vikassharmas at gmail.com
Thu Feb 10 09:13:38 CST 2011
Thanks for the input. Appreciate some more info wrt TCAM usuage if possible.
Another thought, I agree ip schema is individual preference, but I want to
know the best practise (vague term best practice). Personally even I am in
favor of /64 p-t-p.
On Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 12:11 PM, George Bonser <gbonser at seven.com> wrote:
> > I am looking for the recommendation for core interfaces IP addressing
> > schema
> > for Ipv6. Some different views are (PE- P - PE, point to point link)
> > below -
> > 1- Use Public Ipv6 with /122 and do not advertise to Internet
> > 2- Use Public Ipv6 with /127 and do not advertise to Internet
> > 3- Use Unique local ipv6 address
> > 4- Use Public Ipv6 with /64
> > Also I am interested to understand the impact on TCAM ...
> > Regards,
> > Vikas
> I would use a /64 with ND turned off and static neighbors configured.
> TCAM impact will depend on vendor. Some vendors give you the option of
> storing the first 64 bits of a V6 IP or the entire address. Using a /64
> means your CAM usage might be less depending on your vendor.
> If the addresses on the point-to-point links never accept or source
> direct traffic to/from outside your net, you can use whatever you want
> on them. ULA might be ok there. I am using public IPs but I filter
> traffic destined for them at the edge but to each their own choice. But
> if you use ULA you aren't going to be able to ping anything outside your
> net if you source the pings from the ULA interface. Just something to
> keep in mind.
> What you are asking is a matter of individual preference.
More information about the NANOG