[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
subnet prefix length > 64 breaks IPv6?
- Subject: subnet prefix length > 64 breaks IPv6?
- From: Valdis.Kletnieks at vt.edu (Valdis.Kletnieks at vt.edu)
- Date: Tue, 27 Dec 2011 18:35:42 -0500
- In-reply-to: Your message of "Wed, 28 Dec 2011 04:58:19 +0530." <CAPLq3UOF0WzrYe0ak94u=Hgd9rM-Wo=_OygMHDwroKt7Q5zGfA@mail.gmail.com>
- References: <CAPLq3UPJqwrqeOJornSAEQjNa=b7BOB6r3XZWugHUGyLAsq9Wg@mail.gmail.com> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <CAPLq3UNGeFaYoowMh1SPvuifP+RvheCoTsQTB6BkiG4h-qRK+g@mail.gmail.com> <CAPLq3UOF0WzrYe0ak94u=Hgd9rM-Wo=_OygMHDwroKt7Q5zGfA@mail.gmail.com>
On Wed, 28 Dec 2011 04:58:19 +0530, Glen Kent said:
> I had assumed that nodes derive their link local address from the
> Route Advertisements. They derive their least significant 64 bytes
> from their MACs and the most significant 64 from the prefix announced
> in the RAs.
No, on Ethernet-ish networks the link-local is derived from an 'fe80::' and the MAC.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 227 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20111227/7a47e07b/attachment-0001.bin>