APNIC IPv6 transit exchange

[Jeroen Massar]

Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
> On 29 nov 2007, at 18:08, Jeroen Massar wrote:
[..]
>> It definitely would, except that there is one problem with 6to4 which
>> makes it useless for this case, as one can't do:
> 
>> ip ro add 2001:db8::/32 via 2002:c000:022a::1
> 
> Why wouldn't you be able to do that?

Try it ;) it doesn't work unfortunately as:

The 6to4 code will see "hey a a packet destined to 2001:db8::/32" and
then goes "where should that go, it is not 2002:aabb:ccdd::"

In the case of 6to4 the nexthop is never used for actually forwarding
the traffic unfortunately. Thus though in theory it would work, that is
if the _nexthop_ would be used for the target IPv4 address of the
packet, in practice the code looks at the destination address and thus
it fails. Maybe time to update a lot of code to support this?

[..]
>> Yes, point-to-point tunnels between every site with BGP on top of that.
> 
> Too configuration-intensive...

Unfortunately indeed :(

Greets,
 Jeroen

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <https://lists.cluenet.de/pipermail/ipv6-ops/attachments/20071130/98c54de4/attachment.sig>