IPV6 is it usable

ste · January 17, 2014, 8:33am

We’ve now the first Requests for IPV6 which is useful (a snyc SW which does not work on V4).

So we’re considering to add official IPV6 to our Service. Anyone has a only MikroTik-Network with
IPV6 running in parallel to IPV4 (BGP/OSPF/…).

Problems?

raz · January 17, 2014, 11:35am

tried to setup ipv6 with a bgpv4 session, but didnt worked.

ste · January 17, 2014, 12:05pm

support@mikrotik.com could not help?

tomaskir · January 18, 2014, 9:17am

We have full ipv6 with ospfv3 deployed in our network, but our upstream only provides us with a statically routed prefix, no ipv6 bgp from our upstream yet.

Overall, there is a few features missing, but what is in, works.

SwissWISP · January 19, 2014, 1:13pm

There seems to be a problem with the Next Hop in BGP, if you use OSPFv3 as IGP. You will see the Next Hop as “unreachable” in the routing table.
You can find some Information in this forum.

Mat

raz · January 20, 2014, 6:57am

Maybe in some Weeks, have to read completly in and try again. After it wont work, ill ask MT

roadracer96 · January 21, 2014, 8:10pm

Yeah, I just did some testing with it and I had to create a route filter to set the next hop based on the peer. It is setting the next hop to the link local up of the far end peer in multi-hop instead of inheriting the next hop from the static route to the bgp peer.

zimage · April 17, 2014, 7:43pm

Yeah, I just did some testing with it and I had to create a route filter to set the next hop based on the peer. It is setting the next hop to the link local up of the far end peer in multi-hop instead of inheriting the next hop from the static route to the bgp peer.

[/quote]

Could you expand on this with an example of your route filter? I’ve been banging my head on this lack of recursive next hop lookup, OSPFv3, BGP problem for months.