On 26/May/16 21:36, Niklaas Baudet von Gersdorff wrote:
> Here lies the first problem. It seems that it's not legitimate to assign > /96 subnets when using unique local addresses (ULAs). I was right > getting some /48 subnet for my local IPv6 network; some easy way to get > one generated randomly is http://unique-local-ipv6.com/ . But instead of > assigning /96 subnets to each host, you must assign /64 subnets. I guess > (but I am not sure because I have not found any reference that mentions > this explicitly) you *must not* use any other subnet when dealing with > ULAs. > > So I decided for the following two subnets for machine A and > B respectively: fd16:dcc0:f4cc:1::/64 and fd16:dcc0:f4cc:2::/64. Interesting, I did not know that. I know that if you want SLAAC to work, you need to assign a /64 prefix. We use /112's for hosts but based on GUA's, and that works fine. Mark.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
