On Fri, 14 Jun 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >> let me be clear - I usually use either /64 global address prefix, or > >> no global address (link-local only), on p2p link. both works just > >> fine. > >traceroute is my friend. this is an enemy of traceroute. and enemy of > >my friend is my enemy. > > as long as the following two condition holds, traceroute6 work fine. > - intermediate routers are using weak host model > - intermediate routers have at least one global address
Up to some level of "fine". Practically, this works if the conditions hold: - network is small - you know the topology very well Reason for this is that global address assigned to loopback does not give as much information in traceroute as point-to-point links. For example, we embed the names of both ends' routers, the type of the link (implicitly its speed) and the interface slot numer etc. in reverse lookups for the P-t-P addresses, like: router1-ge321-router2 or router3-a1031-router4 (this is at router1's end connecting to router2, on GigaEthernet3/2/1; router3's end connecting to router4, with ATM1/0/3, subinterface 1). There is _no way_ loopbacks are going to give that debugging/tracing information to us :-). I guess there are many ways to use traceroute, and global addresses, coupled with nice reverse lookups are quite invaluable. In small networks especially if you know the topology, this feature is rather useless and link-locals + 1 global is definitely the easiest approach. -- Pekka Savola "Tell me of difficulties surmounted, Netcore Oy not those you stumble over and fall" Systems. Networks. Security. -- Robert Jordan: A Crown of Swords -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List IPng Home Page: http://playground.sun.com/ipng FTP archive: ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng Direct all administrative requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------
