Company XYZ is migrating their existing network to IPv6 and they must plan for Layer 2 and Layer 3 devices. Some of the access layer switches do not support IPv6, however, core and distribution switches fully support unicast and multicast routing. The company wants to minimize cost of the migration. Which migration strategy should be used in the design?

Question

Accepted Answer

D. Layer 2 switches will not affect the implementation of IPv6. They can be included in the design in Layer 2 switches operate at the data link layer and make forwarding decisions based on MAC addresses, not IP addresses. Because they never inspect Layer 3 headers, they transparently carry IPv6 traffic just as they carry IPv4 traffic, making them fully compatible with an IPv6 network without any changes or upgrades required.

Answer

A. The access layer switches must support IGMP snooping at a minimum. Any switches that do not IGMP snooping is a multicast optimization feature and is not a requirement for basic IPv6 unicast forwarding on a Layer 2 access switch.

Answer

B. The access layer switches must support DHCPv6. Any switches that do not support DHCPv6 DHCPv6 is a Layer 3 address assignment protocol handled by routers or dedicated servers, not a capability that needs to reside on Layer 2 access switches.

Answer

C. Upgrade the nonsupporting switches. Otherwise, it will cause an issue with the migration. Upgrading all non-supporting access switches would significantly increase migration cost, contradicting the stated goal of minimizing cost when those switches are Layer 2 only and do not need IPv6 awareness.

Company XYZ is migrating their existing network to IPv6 and they must plan for Layer 2 and Layer 3 devices. Some of the access layer switches do not support IPv6, however, core and distribution…

Question

Options

How the community answered

Why each option

Topics

Community Discussion