Hi, > Just FYI - we've got the answer from TAC now that the ME3400G won't > support an FHRP with IPv4 and IPv6 on the *same interface*. It seems to > be a hardware limitation of this series.
Does this apply only to ME3400 non-E, or to the E series as well? ME3400 non-E is EOL and EOS next month (that could be standard excuse nr1): http://www.cisco.com/en/US/prod/collateral/switches/ps6568/ps6580/end_of_life_notice_c51-726108.html > Call my imagination somewhat limited, but I have a truly hard time > understanding how you could build a hardware that would not be able > to do that. This is basically a pure control-plane functionality, > plus "handle a virtual MAC address" - and if you use the same vmac for > IPv4+IPv6, I can't see how the forwarding hardware would need to know > that there is IPv6 involved as well. Agreed, just punt the packet to the CPU, its not like using one destination mac with multiple applications would be a first: 01:00:0c:cc:cc:cc is used for CDP/VTP/DTP/PAGP/UDLD - and that even includes parsing an LLC header to differentiate the application; here we just need to differentiate based on the EtherType. Probably the "business case" is not big enough to fix this bug, and declaring a WONTFIX for such a severe IPv6 limitation in 2013 would not be very wise from a PR perspective, so they made up the hardware excuse. great! lukas _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
