[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Cisco 'ipv6 route' problem.
- Subject: Cisco 'ipv6 route' problem.
- From: [email protected] (Pim van Pelt)
- Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2001 12:36:23 +0100 (CET)
Hallo,
I have a question for the Cisco people that might be of public interrest.
Assume we have a Cisco that builds a tunnel to an IPv4 endpoint using
a /127 tunnelnetwork. This is interface Tunnel1 and the Cisco endpoint
is 3ffe:8114:1000::2/127.
The Cisco then routes a /64 over the tunnel to the remote server. As far
as I can tell, I can route it via two different commands, which both
result in different behavior!
1. ipv6 route 3ffe:8114:2000:b0::/64 Tunnel1
2. ipv6 route 3ffe:8114:2000:b0::/64 3ffe:8114:1000::3
If you agree with me that this is an unambigous way to define a static
route over the tunnel, please try and explain to my why the rule under (2)
makes for approximately 50% packet loss from hosts on the 6bone to hosts
in the tunneled /64, and also the same packet loss from users in the
/64 to the 6bone.
If I change the rule from (2) to (1), the problem is solved.
(IOS is the thanksgiving release (12.0))
Kind regards,
Pim van Pelt
--
---------- - - - - -+- - - - - ----------
Pim van Pelt Email: [email protected]
http://www.ipng.nl/ IPv6 Deployment
-----------------------------------------------