gmane.org.operators.ipv6

Wiki for people doing IPv6-only testing

Jason Fesler — 2013-06-19T23:56:38

On a recent IPv6 providers call, there was a desire for participants
to share information with each other on what works and what breaks in
an IPv6-only environment.  I offered to set that up.   It was further
suggested I should share this with more than just that small
community; to anyone who might be doing work to test out IPv6-only
scenarios.


http://wiki.test-ipv6.com


This is distinct from ARIN's wiki in so far that this is less about
being a general IPv6 resource and more about the IPv6-only scenario
resource.


Contributions are welcome, but we're requiring folks to sign up before
contributing to keep the spam down.


-jfesler< at >gigo.com / jfesler< at >test-ipv6.com

IPv6 Multicast issue?

jtrotz . — 2013-06-17T16:50:32

I am trying to convert some VMWARE hosted test servers (fedora 18 & Win7)
(on Cisco UCS blade)  to use IPV6.
They are in one part of our internal network on a L2 VLAN hosted on Nexus
5K & 7K switches terminating on a 6500 with a dual stacked L3 interface
(not an SVI).
The end result is that the servers are several L2 hops away from the routed
6500 interface.

The IPV4 connectivity works great!

Using show ipv6 neighbors:   On the 6500 I only see the link-local address
of the neighbor servers.

FE80::250:56FF:FE11:2233                   57 0050.5611.2233  STALE Gi1/24
FE80::7D12:8F6:81C5:5F9A                    1 000c.298f.90cb  STALE Gi1/24
FE80::607A:39E2:A4E3:128D                 125 000c.298f.90c1  STALE Gi1/24
FE80::20C:29FF:FECF:BE5D                   49 000c.29cf.be5d  STALE Gi1/24

On the Win7 server VM  I see:  (netsh interface ipv6 neigh)

Internet Address              Physical Address   Type
----------------------------  -----------------  -----------
2606:2b00:0:a00::1            Unreachable        Unreachable      <==
router on 6500
2606:2b00:0:a00::beef         00-0c-29-cf-be-5d  Stale            <== a
linux server on same VMWARE host
fe80::20c:29ff:fecf:be5d      00-0c-29-cf-be-5d  Stale            <== a
linux server on same VMWARE host
fe80::215:c7ff:fec5:db00      00-15-c7-c5-db-00  Stale (Router)   <==
router on 6500


Its sees both the 6500 router interface's link-local and global addresses,
although the global is "unreachable".

global address.
I tried letting the server pick it's own address using *SLAAC - this worked
OK, so its getting RAs OK. But I can't ping those
*
*addresses either from the 6500.

*
*Installed wireshark on the fedora VM and it sees the router's RAs and the
Win7's neighbor advertisements/solicitations.

*
*Also noticed that when I 1st ping the VM servers link-local addresses
there is a 2 second pause and then it pings OK.**
After doing this I can ping the router's link-local address from the VMs
with no pause, but the ping would fail UNTIL I 1st ping from the router
side.

*
*Is this a case of needing to configure MLD on the nexus and UCS
switches?  Is there anything I need to do to verify its correctly setup?
*
*
*
*any help would be greatly appreciated,

*
*-Jim
*
*
*

ipv6hackers meeting in Berlin (July 28th, 2013)

Fernando Gont — 2013-06-13T11:08:19

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Folks,

- From a couple of years now, we have had a mailing-list devoted to IPv6
hacking (i.e., testing, tools, low-level stuff, etc.). The
mailing-list ("charter", subscription options, etc.) is available at:
<http://lists.si6networks.com/listinfo/ipv6hackers/>.

We're planning to have our first in-person meeting on July 28th, 2013,
in Berlin (most likely in the afternoon, between lunch and the IETF
welcome reception). The venue would be either the IETF venue
(InterContinental Berlin), or some nearby hotel/room (to be confirmed
soon).

We're planning to have some presentations (which MUST be accompanied
with code :-) ), and might also have an IPv6 mini-hackathon (i.e.,
work on code, test implementations, try stuff).

In order to plan for the meeting, we'd need to have some indication of
how many people would attend, whether they would have stuff to
present, etc. So I've set up a very short on-line survey to help us
plan for the meeting.

If you're interested, please take 5 minutes to complete the survey at:
<https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/FFL386K>

Thanks!

Best regards,
- -- 
Fernando Gont
SI6 Networks
e-mail: fgont< at >si6networks.com
PGP Fingerprint: 6666 31C6 D484 63B2 8FB1 E3C4 AE25 0D55 1D4E 7492





- -- 
Fernando Gont
e-mail: fernando< at >gont.com.ar || fgont< at >si6networks.com
PGP Fingerprint: 7809 84F5 322E 45C7 F1C9 3945 96EE A9EF D076 FFF1



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJRuagfAAoJEJbuqe/Qdv/xfSQH/j3z4caZlMcd36EKVEPwHfIy
Fw2lQBRch8IXc+V6bqFOn0wf/zru93pKOef3SJZK8fKTnJe90kAymw464XCltYEp
TThEUiuZo9wNDzCTTE9yuxpCguYenpr9oCHzvux9fdPm1l0hhe7yuse3yuahnf6H
i56lwsSmr2T2U3+2xEAvOcpzkxoidH193Su4c8FSf8aT74kz4z5XjsaRNbqZEQpd
jIVvom9ucCy3u4coPAHaPe9nePx6+JaZZ5wW08i2bH3EAHxL6iMM9/biNzYVlKYu
BxgFUCYVVK1CTV9PqdPFFe4cp2TLz/0D/LL/jXCpbISVRs4FWdQipP4zqyOn0kY=
=iok7
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

godaddy ipv6 nameservers are not reachable

Mohacsi Janos — 2013-06-12T14:49:23

Dear All,

from our AS1955, and  part of the Internet(according to different 
looking glasses) GoDaddy IPv6 nameservers are not reachable.

dns03.domaincontrol.com.      AAAA    2607:f208:207::33
pdns04.domaincontrol.com.      AAAA    2607:f208:303::33

RP/0/RSP0/CPU0:rtr1.vh#traceroute 2607:f208:207::33 
Tue Jun 11 15:04:17.907 CEST

Type escape sequence to abort.
Tracing the route to 2607:f208:207::33

  1  2001:798:1b:10aa::5 2 msec 1 msec 0 msec
  2  2001:798:cc:1b01:1b01::1 1 msec 1 msec 0 msec
  3  2001:798:cc:3301:1b01::5 3 msec 7 msec 3 msec
  4  2001:798:cc:1301:3301::1 7 msec 7 msec 7 msec
  5  2001:798:cc:1301:1401::6 13 msec 14 msec 13 msec
  6  2001:7f8::1b1b:0:1 19 msec 19 msec 25 msec
  7  2001:470:0:1d4::2 28 msec 37 msec 28 msec
  8  2001:470:0:1b1::1 115 msec 126 msec 114 msec
  9  2001:504:0:2::209:1 112 msec 112 msec 145 msec
  10 2001:428::205:171:2:213 194 msec 193 msec 192 msec
  11 2001:428:5802:10::2 183 msec 183 msec 183 msec
  12  ?  *  ?
  13  *  *  ?
  14  *  *  *
  15  *  *



traceroute to 2607:f208:207::33 (2607:f208:207::33), 30 hops max, 40 byte 
packets
  1  gw.ipv6.dev.nikrtr.ripe.net (2001:67c:2e8:2::1:1)  0.432 ms  0.411 ms 
0.428 ms
  2  amsix-501.xe-0-0-0.jun1.bit-1.network.bit.nl (2001:7f8:1::a501:2859:2) 
2.306 ms  2.345 ms  2.324 ms
  3  805.ge-0-0-0.jun1.thn.network.bit.nl (2001:7b8:0:325::2)  24.777 ms 
24.388 ms  24.756 ms
  4  * * *
  5  * * *


Not from HE:
core1.fmt1.he.net> traceroute ipv6 2607:f208:207::33

Tracing the route to IPv6 node 2607:f208:207::33 from 1 to 30 hops

   1    22 ms    7 ms   <1 ms 2001:470:0:2d::2
   2    18 ms  104 ms   20 ms 2001:470:0:18d::2
   3     9 ms   39 ms   25 ms 2001:504:0:3::209:1
   4    24 ms   47 ms   27 ms 2001:428::205:171:2:213
   5    25 ms   37 ms   37 ms 2001:428:5802:10::2
   6    *       *       *     ?
   7    *       *       *     ?
   8    *       *       *     ?
   9    *       *       *     ?


However it is working from Nordunet:

traceroute6 to 2607:f208:207::33 (2607:f208:207::33) from 
2001:6b0:1e:1::35, 64 hops max, 12 byte packets
  1  t1fre-ae5-v1.sunet.se (2001:6b0:1e:1::36)  0.540 ms  0.476 ms  0.465 
ms
  2  se-fre.nordu.net (2001:948:0:f051::1)  0.383 ms  0.428 ms  0.377 ms
  3  dk-ore.nordu.net (2001:948:1:2::3)  10.177 ms  9.782 ms  9.756 ms
  4  uk-hex.nordu.net (2001:948:1:8::2)  39.687 ms  39.877 ms  36.170 ms
  5  us-ash.nordu.net (2001:948:1:11::3)  112.198 ms  112.242 ms  112.165 
ms
  6  2001:504:0:2:0:2:6496:1 (2001:504:0:2:0:2:6496:1)  113.408 ms  113.278 
ms  113.210 ms
  7  2607:f208:3:100::1 (2607:f208:3:100::1)  113.022 ms  112.850 ms 
131.426 ms
  8  2607:f208:3:100::102 (2607:f208:3:100::102)  112.813 ms  112.697 ms 
136.299 ms
  9  2607:f208:3:100::102 (2607:f208:3:100::102)  119.837 ms !P  112.665 ms 
!P  112.754 ms !P



Can you help debugging where the routing is misconfgured?

thanks,
Janos Mohacsi

Windows 2008R2 MTU reverts to default

Dick Visser — 2013-06-10T12:57:26

Hi


I'm trying to debug a connectivity issue on a Windows 2008R2 system,
and I'd like to carry out some tests with different MTUs.
According to the docs at
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc753156(v=ws.10).aspx#BKMK_setinterface
I issue this command:

C:\Windows\system32>netsh interface ipv6 set interface "Local Area
Connection" mtu=1400
Ok.

I then see:

C:\Windows\system32>netsh interface ipv6 show interfaces

Idx     Met         MTU          State                Name
---  ----------  ----------  ------------  ---------------------------
  1          50  4294967295  connected     Loopback Pseudo-Interface 1
 10          10        1400  connected     Local Area Connection


This works for a while, but after a minute or so it changes back to the default:

C:\Windows\system32>netsh interface ipv6 show interfaces

Idx     Met         MTU          State                Name
---  ----------  ----------  ------------  ---------------------------
  1          50  4294967295  connected     Loopback Pseudo-Interface 1
 10          10        1500  connected     Local Area Connection


The default netsh behavior should be to save it persistently, but upon
reboot the MTU is always 1500.


Any ideas what might be causing this?


I just tried out a Windows 7 machine and that seem to remember what
it's being told with netsh.


Thanks!!

Facebook broken over v6?

Aaron Hughes — 2013-06-07T16:12:26

Anyone else getting connection hangs and closes to Facebook?

www.facebook.com is an alias for star.c10r.facebook.com.
star.c10r.facebook.com has address 66.220.152.19
star.c10r.facebook.com has IPv6 address 2a03:2880:2110:3f07:face:b00c::1
star.c10r.facebook.com mail is handled by 10 msgin.t.facebook.com.
Trying 2a03:2880:2110:3f07:face:b00c::1...
Connected to edge-star6-shv-03-frc1.facebook.com.
Escape character is '^]'.
get /

Connection closed by foreign host.


------

Trying 66.220.152.19...
Connected to edge-star-shv-09-frc1.facebook.com.
Escape character is '^]'.
get /
HTTP/1.1 400 Bad Request
Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8
Connection: close
Content-Length: 2131

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN"
   "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd">
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"
   xml:lang="en" lang="en" id="facebook">
  <head>
    <title>Facebook | Error</title>
    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type"  content="text/html; charset=utf-8" />
    <meta http-equiv="Cache-Control" content="no-cache" />
    <meta name="robots"              content="noindex,nofollow" />
    <style type="text/css">
      html, body {
        margin:       0px;
        padding:      0px;
        text-align:   center;
        font-family:  "Lucida Grande", "Tahoma", "Verdana", "Arial", sans-serif;
        color:        #333333;
      }

      a.menu {
        margin:     auto;
        position:   relative;
        display:    block;
        width:      964px;
        height:     29px;
        background: #3B5998 url('https://s-static.ak.fbcdn.net/common/error.png')
                    top center no-repeat;
      }

      .core {
        text-align: left;
        margin:     auto;
        width:      904px;
        padding:    1em 0em;
      }

      h1 {
        font-size:  18px;
      }

      p {
        font-size:  13px;
      }

      .footer {
    border-top: 1px solid #DDDDDD;
        color:      #777777;
        float:      left;
        width:      904px;
        padding:    5px 8px 6px 0;
        font-size:  11px;
      }
    </style>
    <script type="text/javascript" charset="utf-8">
      function back() {
        if (1 < history.length) {
          history.back();
          return false;
        }
        return true;
      }
    </script>
  </head>
  <body>
    <a class="menu" href="http://www.facebook.com/"></a>
    <div class="core">
      <h1>Sorry, something went wrong.</h1>
      <p>We're working on getting this fixed as soon as we can.</p>
      <p><a onclick="return back();" href="http://www.facebook.com/">Go Back</a></p>
      <div class="footer" id="pagefooter_copyright">
        Facebook &copy;
        2012
        &#183;
        <a href="http://www.facebook.com/help/">Help</a>
      </div>
    </div>
  </body>
</html>
Connection closed by foreign host.

Point-to-point /64

Arturo Servin — 2013-06-01T14:04:27

Hi,

I would like to ask which measures is people taking to protect p-2-p
links that are configured with a /64. So far I imagine things like
rate-limiting, ACLs, etc. But still that is a bit abstract of what to do
in a router.

If you have some configuration examples it would be great (Cisco,
juniper would be fine, we have both).

Regards,
as

6PE mapped addresses used for ICMPv6 responses - knob to fix that?

Jeroen Massar — 2013-05-30T19:31:29

In relation to the fd00::/8 thread, it seems the bug with respect to 6PE
is not resolved yet.

That is, if you have 6PE (IPv4 LSP) in your network routers might send
an ICMPv6 message from the IPv6-Mapped-IPv4 address.

And as :::ffff:0.0.0.0/96 should not be in anybody's BGP table, it will
fail uRPF.

Is anybody aware of a knob that can force for instance the loopback
address to be used on these boxes?

Greets,
 Jeroen

is gmail strongly penalizing IPv6 senders?

Marco d'Itri — 2013-05-30T14:46:02

I have noticed in the last few days that mail sent to gmail from a 
significant number of our servers (both shared hosting / mail relays and 
dedicated servers of our customers) with IPv6 connectivity is delivered 
to the spam folder.
If there has been spamming activity (as a result of some security 
incident, I am not an ESP) from some of these servers then it is not 
recent.
The reputation problem is tied to the IP address, because after adding 
a new one in the same /64 mail is delivered to the inbox.


(OTOH, recently I have received significant complaints from customers 
about gmail rejecting connections or delivering to the spam folder even 
long after a security incident, so this may be not specific to IPv6.)

Usage of fd00::/8 on the Interwebz - something with filters and uRPF

Jeroen Massar — 2013-05-29T19:59:04

...
 4  2001:7f8:1::a500:3303:1 (2001:7f8:1::a500:3303:1)  20.755 ms  20.763 ms  20.784 ms
 5  fd00:3303::1 (fd00:3303::1)  22.010 ms  21.984 ms  21.986 ms
 6  2a02:120c:1051:d010::1 (2a02:120c:1051:d010::1)  17.806 ms  17.889 ms  17.842 ms
 7  2a02:120c:1051:d010::1 (2a02:120c:1051:d010::1)  18.720 ms  18.593 ms  18.617 ms
...

Hmmmm fd00::/8, that really should never ever be visible on the Internet, being Unique *LOCAL* Addresses.
And it does not look like they applied the randomness bit for picking a prefix either.
You would also almost think that a /28 is more than enough address space to put a few router loopbacks in.

It is apparently time for people to start checking their filters again because it seems that these packets leak into other ASNs too...

More generally, do recheck your network for BCP38 compliance, please do apply it and require your peers to do the same!

Greets,
 Jeroen

Another IPv6 forum

Brian E Carpenter — 2013-05-26T20:21:26

I just found this resource; it may interest some people here:
http://networkengineering.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/ipv6

Fresh meat

Mat Ford — 2013-05-22T16:20:23

May's numbers are up: http://www.worldipv6launch.org/measurements/

Mat

Avoiding EUI64 addresses on Ubuntu 12.04

Dick Visser — 2013-05-22T13:41:50

Hi

I'm trying to configure an Ubuntu 12.04 Server VM with static IP addresses.
The config is this:


# The loopback network interface
auto lo
iface lo inet loopback

# The primary network interface
auto eth0
iface eth0 inet static
        address 192.87.38.9
        netmask 255.255.255.192
        gateway 192.87.38.1

# IPv6 static address
iface eth0 inet6 static
        address 2001:610:148:cafe::9
        netmask 64
        autoconf 0
        privext 0
        dns-search terena.org
        dns-domain terena.org
        dns-nameservers 2001:610:1:800a:192:87:106:106
2001:610:188:140:145:100:188:188


Because there is a bug in network-manager, I also set this in
/etc/sysctl.d/10-ipv6-privacy.conf:

net.ipv6.conf.all.use_tempaddr = 0
net.ipv6.conf.default.use_tempaddr = 0

After rebooting I still have the EUI64 address:


eth0      Link encap:Ethernet  HWaddr 00:50:56:86:00:0f
          inet addr:192.87.38.9  Bcast:192.87.38.63  Mask:255.255.255.192
          inet6 addr: 2001:610:148:cafe:250:56ff:fe86:f/64 Scope:Global
          inet6 addr: fe80::250:56ff:fe86:f/64 Scope:Link
          inet6 addr: 2001:610:148:cafe::9/64 Scope:Global
          UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST  MTU:1500  Metric:1
          RX packets:477 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
          TX packets:474 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
          collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000
          RX bytes:90380 (90.3 KB)  TX bytes:76199 (76.1 KB)

lo        Link encap:Local Loopback
          inet addr:127.0.0.1  Mask:255.0.0.0
          inet6 addr: ::1/128 Scope:Host
          UP LOOPBACK RUNNING  MTU:16436  Metric:1
          RX packets:222 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
          TX packets:222 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
          collisions:0 txqueuelen:0
          RX bytes:16746 (16.7 KB)  TX bytes:16746 (16.7 KB)


Any idea how to get rid of it?
This is a server, and I don't want privacy/security extensions, just
the manually configured address.


Thanks!!!

New IPv6 king of the hill: Switzerland?

Tore Anderson — 2013-05-21T12:58:20

Just noticed that Switzerland's IPv6 deployment level (according to
Google) has been skyrocketing lately, anyone know if this is just an
outlier or something real and big going on?

http://www.vyncke.org/ipv6status/compare.php?metric=p&countries=ch

$ google-ipv6-adoption.pl
PosIPv6%Country
=======================
19.47%Switzerland
28.63%Romania
34.99%France
44.65%Luxembourg
53.25%Bhutan
[...]

Tore

DHCPv6 accounting

Liviu Pislaru — 2013-05-21T12:00:24

Hello,

I have DHCPv6 related question and maybe someone here can help me out 
finding the right answer.

If you use DHCP (for IPv4) and dot1x you are able to identify who's 
using what IPv4 address because MAC address information is present in 
both DHCP (MAC - IP) and Radius (MAC - SWITCH PORT - USERNAME) logs.

With DHCPv6 i didn't find a way to do that (identify what IPv6 is 
allocated to which customer) without asking any additional information 
from the customer (like DUID).
As far as i see MAC address information is not always sent to the DHCPv6 
server (DUID may contain the MAC address but not always), IPv6 LL is not 
always eui-64 generated (see Windows randomisation) to identify the MAC 
address based on that and i also didn't find a common attribute (like 
client id) for DHCPv4 and DHCPv6 to link the IPv6 address to IPv4 
address and then use IPv4 accounting.

Any ideas are most appreciated !

thanks,
--
Liviu.

http://www.6assist.net/ - call for test

Max Tulyev — 2013-05-10T09:17:11

Hi All,

We are developping a new kind of IPv6 tunnel broker. The main idea is
let the traffic flow directly between peers, not through the tunnel
broker server.

The website of that project is http://www.6assist.net/

It acts like a virtual media IXP, and anybody have own ASN can join it.

Any suggestions are welcome! ;)

Announcing RIPE assigned prefix in ARIN/APNIC region

Peter Mueller — 2013-05-02T20:39:46

Dear List,

i am currently in the middle of our IPv6 planning, and i have a simple
question which i just can't find an answer.

We received a /32 from RIPE and my initial address plan consisted of
creating several /36, assign them per geographical region (Europe/Asia/NA
etc.) and assign a /40 for our datacenters in these regions.

One question which came to my mind was whether or not it is ok to announce
a RIPE assigned prefix (the /36) in the ARIN/APNIC Region? or should i go
to ARIN/APNIC and request additional prefixes?

I want to do things right at the beginning, which is the reason i am asking
here. I couldn't find any information in the ripe-552 document, and my
google fu failed me miserably, but this could also be a layer 8 problem ;)
Feel free to slap me if this is the case

I would appreciate any input (e.g. how you are doing it) or pointers to
documents which clarifies this question.

Thanks for your help,

Kind regards,
Peter

RA Guard support...

Vytautas V Grigaliunas — 2013-05-01T16:49:31

Hi...

Anybody come across a list of switches supporting RA Guard ?

TIA...

Vyto Grigaliunas - Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory

enterprise IPv6 only client computers and IPv4 connectivity

Mikael Abrahamsson — 2013-04-30T07:03:37

Hi,

If an enterprise today would decide that they're going to run IPv6 only on 
their LAN, they would have recent Win7|Win8|OSX|Ubuntu clients on their 
client computers, what mechanism would they use to access IPv4 Internet?

My thinking immediately went to DS-lite, NAT64/DNS64 and MAP-E, but I 
NAT64/DNS64 isn't "good enough" without 464XLAT, and DS-lite and MAP-E 
requires additional software on most of these operating systems, right? 
Are these kinds of client software even available?

What other mechanism could be used to achieve IPv4 Internet reachability 
over IPv6 only access for end-systems? HTTP proxy or SOCKS-proxy also 
sounds too cumbersome.

IPv6 Policy based routing?

Dick Visser — 2013-04-19T09:30:07

Hi guys

I'd like to implement a transparent proxy in my network, and for that
I need Policy Based Routing to work for VLANs on our Cisco 3750X. We
appear to be in good shape:

gatekeeper#sho sdm prefer
 The current template is "desktop IPv4 and IPv6 routing" template.
 The selected template optimizes the resources in  the switch to
support this level of features for
 8 routed interfaces and 1024 VLANs.

  number of unicast mac addresses:                  1.5K
  number of IPv4 IGMP groups + multicast routes:    1K
  number of IPv4 unicast routes:                    2.75K
    number of directly-connected IPv4 hosts:        1.5K
    number of indirect IPv4 routes:                 1.25K
  number of IPv6 multicast groups:                  1K
  number of directly-connected IPv6 addresses:      1.5K
  number of indirect IPv6 unicast routes:           1.25K
  number of IPv4 policy based routing aces:         0.25K
  number of IPv4/MAC qos aces:                      0.5K
  number of IPv4/MAC security aces:                 0.5K
  number of IPv6 policy based routing aces:         0.25K
  number of IPv6 qos aces:                          0.5K
  number of IPv6 security aces:                     0.5K


But if I actually try to use it, it works for IPv4, but no go for IPv6:

gatekeeper#conf t
Enter configuration commands, one per line.  End with CNTL/Z.
gatekeeper(config)#interface vlan 20
gatekeeper(config-if)#ipv6 policy
                           ^
% Invalid input detected at '^' marker.

Turns out the switch doesn't do it at all:

http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/switches/lan/catalyst3750x_3560x/software/release/15.0_1_se/configuration/guide/swipv6.html#wp1115839

Cisco says it's not supported on any platform.

Since I'll be needed a new switch any way, I might as well look beyond
Cisco. I hear that a Juniper EX4200 might do it. Other might as well.
However, I'd rather buy a new box based on real world experience that
it supports a feature, than based on docs saying it supports it - and
then later finding out that it doesn't because of corner case x, y and
z.

So, are there people here that are succesfully using dual stack Policy
Based Routing on a VLAN, on a similar switch?

Many thanks,



--
Dick Visser
System & Networking Engineer
TERENA Secretariat
Singel 468 D, 1017 AW Amsterdam
The Netherlands

IPV6 in the network core and MPLS

Jim Trotz — 2013-04-12T10:19:59

I have been trying to find out if we can use MPLS & LDP to setup MPLS VPNS
within our all IPV6 network. Everything I read says no, LDP & MPLS don't
support native IPV6, you have to use 6VPE and IPV4 in the core.

Is this true?          PS: We are an all Cisco IOS/NXOS based network.