IPv6 - possible issue or maybe the way it works

[chieftan]

Hi,

Is there a reason why a /48 under a prefix of /29, when applied to an interface, automatically appears with a /128 instead of /48?

Example: xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:ffff:ffff:ffff:0000:000e

Is this how IPv6 works on the interfaces as each address is unique anyway? No subnets really exist as such in IPv6....

Thanks for any help

 

[chieftan]

Actually, I'm guessing that the /128 is assigning it "Link-Local" address, therefore I am obviously calculating my / incorrectly from the original assigned /29.....

So, in reality, I guess I am getting a little confused as to how I can work out the /48s from an original block of /29 .... I am not sure of the starting address and ending address

 

[chieftan]

I have actually figured this issue out, from a Cisco perspective.... My problem now is with Juniper.... But I think with Juniper it is the version of code I am running as the:

set security forwarding-options

Is not present under security..... but

Set forwarding-options is present, but then the "iso" section is not available after this....

I will ask Juniper directly....

Thanks

 

[chieftan]

I now have what I wanted to achieve which is an IS-IS / IPv6 working topology. Everything working as expected.