-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Jared Mauch wrote: > > Jared Mauch > > On Aug 16, 2010, at 5:01 PM, Ole Troan <[email protected]> wrote: > >>>>> please ping my router, it's interface address is: >>>>> fe80::20e:cff:fe5c:b001/64 >>>>> >>>>> my monitoring system can't ping this to ensure liveness of the >>>>> interface either :( >>>> but they can ping whatever global /128 you put on that interface, so why >>>> doesn't that solve the problems? >>> Because you are then using one set of addresses for protool peerings >>> and another one for global ping - thus making life more complicated >>> for the operator. >> is that any more "complicated" (I don't quite understand that argument) than >> using IS-IS? >> > > Yes.
yes. I tried something close to it 5 years ago and it was hell. Regards, Seiichi -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32) iEYEARECAAYFAkxp0YgACgkQcrhTYfxyMkKmVQCdFv4RNW2SsvpEjHbk491GeY6q y6kAnRLLyg6xiSjNN6npIkwxfc0Pckna =lfuh -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list [email protected] Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
