[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
IPv6 Confusion
- Subject: IPv6 Confusion
- From: jbates at brightok.net (Jack Bates)
- Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2009 12:32:26 -0600
- In-reply-to: <[email protected]>
- References: <6CDE22DE80A63A4DACF4FE2C916519A53F022F784D@BLV11EXVS01.corp.dm.local> <[email protected]>
Mohacsi Janos wrote:
> If you are interested about the addressing architecture only, have a
> look at RFC 4291: http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4291
>
> If you want to have some allocation guidelines from experiences, have a
> look at these slides:
> http://www.6deploy.org/tutorials/030-6deploy_ipv6_addressing_v0_2.pdf
> http://www.6deploy.org/tutorials/031-IPv6_addr_case_RENATER_Hungarnet_v0_1.pdf
>
> http://www.6deploy.org/tutorials/131_Campus_IPv6_deployment_consideration_v0_3.pdf
>
Just to add to this, beware the vendor documentation. In particular, I
noticed many "examples" posted by vendors that used all kinds of
notations. Cisco, for example, formally uses /64 in current
documentation but still has a ton of old docs which use /112 or other
similar boundaries. Since searches don't always turn up "most current",
you may find obsolete documentation.
-Jack