Tags:


Forum Replies

  1. First, let me say that I built this (I ignored router D, and just did an A-B-C triangle), and it worked fine. Obviously, this topology is different from the first one you asked about, so let’s keep our references the same from here out.

    I am suspicious of your IPv6 global addresses. Here’s a break down from your output above:

    A:
    2001:DB8:3C4D:1:240:BFF:FEEA:9201
    
    B:
    2001:DB8:3C4D:1:230:A3FF:FEA1:4201
    
    C
    0/0
    2001:DB8:3C4D:1::1/64
    
    0/1
    2001:DB8:3C4D:2::1/64
    

    It appears to me that A and B both have 2001 addresses on the same /64 subnet, while C is using addresse

    ... Continue reading in our forum

  2. Ok first question. In you post you have the following below. YOu will notice its pointing to :2:2 however there is no :2:2 network on any of the routers is this a typo did you mean to say :23:23::??? also its a 64 instead of a 128 which is what the loopback is. However maybe all addresses are held within the 128?? So your just pointing to a non-existent address knowing that since the one is a prefix of 128 that can hold all addresses so its being sent that way. very cryptic though and I wanted to confirm.

    if this is just a typo then you might want to

    ... Continue reading in our forum

  3. Hello Brian

    It seems that @ReneMolenaar is using the 2001:2:2::/64 prefix for the L0 interface on R2 in the first diagram, but when he adds R3 to the topology, he changes it to 2001:23:23::/64. I’ll let him know to change it so that it is consistent all the way through the lesson, either 2:2 or 23:23, including the routing tables.

    ... Continue reading in our forum

25 more replies! Ask a question or join the discussion by visiting our Community Forum