> -----邮件原件-----
> 发件人: WashamFan [mailto:[email protected]]
> 发送时间: 2010年1月21日 17:31
> 收件人: Rémi Després
> 抄送: Xu Xiaohu; [email protected]
> 主题: Re: [Softwires] routing loop issue//re: Please review 6rd
> 
> Hi,
> 
> If 6rd-A and 6rd-B belong to the same 6rd domain, I don't see the routing
loops.

Yes, in case that the two 6rd BR use the same 6rd prefix which is almost
Provider-Independent IPv6 address.

However, if the two BRs use different 6rd prefixes, that is to say, each BR
was allocated a PA address for 6rd prefix from its own upstream IPv6 ISP,
there is a possibility of routing loop.

Xiaohu


> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Rémi Després <[email protected]>
> Date: Thursday, January 21, 2010 4:04 pm
> Subject: Re: [Softwires] routing loop issue//re:  Please review 6rd
> To: Xu Xiaohu <[email protected]>
> Cc: [email protected]
> 
> 
> >  Le 21 janv. 2010 à 08:42, Xu Xiaohu a écrit :
> >
> >
> >  >
> >  >    +------------------------+
> >  >    |                        |
> >  >    |                        |
> >  >    |     IPv6 Internet      |
> >  >    |                        |
> >  >    +------+----------+------+
> >  >           |          |
> >  >           |          |
> >  >        +--+--+     +--+--+
> >  >    +---+6rd-A+-----+6rd-B+--+
> >  >    |   +-----+     +-----+  |
> >  >    |                        |
> >  >    |        IPv4 ISP        |
> >  >    |       +-------+        |
> >  >    +-------+ CPE-1 +--------+
> >  >            +---+---+
> >  >                |
> >  >          +-----+-----+
> >  >          |           |
> >  >          | IPv6 Site |
> >  >          +-----------+
> >  >
> >  > In the above scenario, two 6rd BRs are configured with the same
> > address for
> >  > anycast service. Assuming the nearest 6rd BR for the CPE is 6rd-A,
> > all IPv6
> >  > packets from the IPv6 site and destined to the IPv6 internet will be
> >  > tunneled towards 6rd-A by the CPE. Once 6rd-A lost connections to
> > the IPv6
> >  > Internet, some failover mechanism should be used to direct these
packets
> >  > towards 6rd-B.
> >
> >  > One possible solution is: 6rd-A withdraws the route to the
> >  > IPv6 Internet, which was advertised in IPv4 ISP network previously,
> > as soon
> >  > as its connection to the IPv6 Internet is lost.
> >
> >  This is in my understanding the right solution, precisely because
> > protection against routing loops can be achieved by preventing tunnels
> > between BRs.
> >
> >
> >  > Another solution is:
> >  > establish a softwire tunnel between the two 6rd BRs for failover
> > route. With
> >  > the latter solution, some normal packets tunneled in the softwire
during
> >  > failover will be filtered mistakenly.
> >
> >  That's why the other solution should be preferred.
> >
> >  RD
> >
> >  _______________________________________________
> >  Softwires mailing list
> >  [email protected]
> >  https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires
> >

_______________________________________________
Softwires mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires

Reply via email to