* Jay Hanke
I haven't, but I cannot begin to fathom how that could possibly work.
https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-chroboczek-int-v4-via-v6-01.html
How can the receiving router possibly resolve an IPv4 next-hop
address
to an destination Ethernet MAC address, if the interface facing
the IX
does not have any IPv4 addresses assigned?
A router only needs to know the l2 address to forward a frame. So
there would be no ipv4 address on the transitory network just an ipv6
that resolves to a Mac address.
Kind of like ipv4 unnumbered but with ipv6 addresses on the segment.
Multiprotocol bgp would be used for the next hops.
In your original message you said you wanted to advertise routes *IPv4*
next-hops over an IPv6-only IX.
The I-D you are linking to are not about that, but about advertising
IPv4 routes with an *IPv6* next-hop. That is the exact opposite of what
you asked about.
Advertising IPv6 next-hops over an IPv6-only IX is of course completely
unproblematic, since the destination MAC address can then be resolved
with standard ICMPv6 ND.
Advertising IPv4 prefixes with IPv6 next-hops is also entirely
unproblematic, assuming the routers involved support extended next-hop
encoding (RFC 5549/8950).
What you did ask about initially, though, that is, using IPv4 next-hops
across an IPv6-only IX, does seem impossible to me.
Tore
