<div dir="ltr">/127 is actually what IETF recommends in RFC6164 (<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6164">http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6164</a>)<div style>/126 is not officially supported in this RFC.</div><div style>
<br></div><div style>I have used /127 on "real" P2P links as well as Ethernet links connecting 2 routers.</div><div style><br></div><div style>Arie</div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">
On Sat, Jun 1, 2013 at 2:30 PM, <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:sthaug@nethelp.no" target="_blank">sthaug@nethelp.no</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div class="im">> > I do /127 p2p<br>
> ><br>
> > Subnet anycast is not a supported feature or requirment in my network.<br>
><br>
> As subnet anycast is a integral part of IPv6, you might not want to<br>
> support or require it, but the gear will implement it and thus one point<br>
> it will bite you as suddenly it won't work.<br>
><br>
> Likely though you are just putting the PtP links as 2x /128 and not as a<br>
> /127 on the link. The former works, the latter breaks.<br>
<br>
</div>Funny, /127 works great for "real" point to point links (SDH). I tried<br>
it just now on an Ethernet link between a JunOS 11.4 box and an IOS XR<br>
4.2.3 box in my lab - and it seems to work just great there too.<br>
<br>
What is the real usage of IPv6 subnet anycast?<br>
<br>
Steinar Haug, AS 2116<br>
<br>
</blockquote></div><br></div>