On 10/18/2018 10:19 AM, Erik Auerswald wrote:
Hi,
Hi,
The original question was a bit scarce on details, thus I substituted pertinent experience of my own. This is not necessarily easy to follow. ;)
Fair enough.
Please tell us about your results.
Will do.My intention is to create the following configuration using network namespaces:
(A)---1---(B)---2---(C)Where A, B, and C are the test network namespaces and 1 and 2 are vEth pairs between them.
I was originally going to start with one test, see if A could communicate with B via 2.B.
After your earlier email about hosts moving from one physical network to another, I'm going to see if 1 can be configured with 2.A and communicate with 2.B via the 1 network.
I'll share the commands I use to create the lab topology and subsequent commands to test.
In IPv6, addresses are assigned to interfaces. This is obvious with link-local addresses, but true for differently scoped addresses as well. I am sorry, but I do not know the RFC off the top of my head.
Fair enough.
OK, had to search...
;-) Thank you.
RFC 8200, Internet Protocol, Version 6 (IPv6) Specification, section 2:
"interface a node's attachment to a link."
"address an IPv6-layer identifier for an interface or a set of
interfaces."
RFC 4291, IP Version 6 Addressing Architecture, section 2.1:
"IPv6 addresses of all types are assigned to interfaces, not nodes."
That is quite succinct. I'm glad that's codified.
IPv6 is an interesting rabbit hole to dive into. ;)
Yep.I've done a fair bit with IPv6 at a shallow level. I'm now going to be reading more and getting into a deeper level.
They might even be a bit simpler to use without a 100% correct networking configuration. ;)
I think that a single homed machine with a single IPv4 address (ignoring loopback) is quite simple. Even if it has a routing table with more than a default gateway.
Likewise. :)
:-) -- Grant. . . . unix || die
Attachment:
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
