|
Is /48 subnet really needed ?
![[fr]](/s/countries/fr.gif) Shadow Hawkins on Monday, 13 September 2010 13:47:14
The documentation says only ::1 and ::2 are routed, but this set up was working for me:
Setting the ::1/64 as default gateway on router
Generating static or EUI64 address on clients.
Setting the ::2/64 as default gateway on clients
Why would I need a /48 for -only one- subnet ?
Is /48 subnet really needed ?
The documentation says only ::1 and ::2 are routed, but this set up was working for me:
Only <tunnel>::1 and <tunnel>::2 of a tunnel prefix.
In a subnet (/48) everything is routed to <tunnel>::2.
Why would I need a /48 for -only one- subnet ?
Because a /48 contains 65536 /64's and the tunnel prefix cannot be used except for the tunnel endpoints...
Is /48 subnet really needed ?
![[dk]](/s/countries/dk.gif) Shadow Hawkins on Thursday, 16 September 2010 21:33:32
Wouldn't it work to have the router nat'ing the hosts inside to the ::2 adress?
Although that somehow defeats the purpose of ipv6
Is /48 subnet really needed ?
![[de]](/s/countries/de.gif) Shadow Hawkins on Tuesday, 21 September 2010 16:07:32
hi,
IPv6 do not need NAT and do not like NAT ..
Is /48 subnet really needed ?
![[us]](/s/countries/us.gif) Shadow Hawkins on Thursday, 04 November 2010 23:53:52
IPv6 doesn't support NAT
Is /48 subnet really needed ?
Shadow Hawkins on Friday, 17 December 2010 01:11:32
Actually IPv6 does support NAT. It's not really used as of yet, but eventually it will be needed. There is a finite number of IPv6 addresses, so it will be needed.
|
![[ch]](/s/countries/ch.gif)
on Tuesday, 14 September 2010 14:04:50
Posting is only allowed when you are