using "reserved" IPv6 space
bhmccie at gmail.com
Fri Jul 13 15:45:57 UTC 2012
I think they would. I'm just a bit too new to this. Thanks.
"I was a normal American nerd"
On 7/13/2012 10:05 AM, TJ wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 10:38 AM, -Hammer- <bhmccie at gmail.com
> <mailto:bhmccie at gmail.com>> wrote:
> OK. I'm pretty sure I'm gonna get some flak for this but I'll
> share this question and it's background anyway. Please be gentle.
> In the past, with IPv4, we have used reserved or "non-routable"
> space Internally in production for segments that won't be seen
> anywhere else. Examples? A sync VLAN for some FWs to share state.
> An IBGP link between routers that will never be seen or
> advertised. In those cases, we have often used 192.0.2.0/24
> <http://192.0.2.0/24>. It's reserved and never used and even if it
> did get used one day we aren't "routing" it internally. It's just
> on segments where we need some L3 that will never be seen.
> On to IPv6
> I was considering taking the same approach. Maybe using 0100::/8
> or 1000::/4 or A000::/3 as a space for this.
> Would using "just" Link Locals not be sufficient?
> /(Failing that, as others noted, ULAs are the next "right" answer ... )/
More information about the NANOG