On 26 Oct 2020 17:57, B F wrote: > Looking for any fresh experience with this: > > https://docs.aws.amazon.com/vpn/latest/s2svpn/VPNTunnels.html > <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.aws.amazon.com_vpn_latest_s2svpn_VPNTunnels.html&d=DwMFaQ&c=uYNHtGtKbnb8KY_aWQH_nw&r=rdjfZQefpT_LdC_BOcEEpw&m=cOAeqtk8BvD_8rwuvYiLdhl4JrJs6NZR0qY7uRIoajg&s=clsyJTjLlh2voqF13Lny9y8vAUWziL95IobbMLlgDdM&e=> > > Any problems experienced with using that reserved space as a non-local > destination? Seems like it might not be wise WRT RFC3927. > > Apparently space from RFC1918 is not an option. > > Found a few hits in the archives (2012) but looking recent experience. > > Thank you very much in advance. >
Using 169.254.0.0/16 or fe80::/64 Link-Local space as next-hop shouldn't cause you to much of a head-egg. One point to remember is "just" rewriting the next-hop address to a network reachable for your other routers and switches to forward the traffic towards. (e.g. the loopback address of your router peering with AWS Private Cloud) -- Chriztoffer
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
