As shown in the figure, in a pure IPv6 environment, if you want to realize the communication between PC1 and PC2, which of the following groups of addresses can be configured on PC1 and P2…

Question

Options

• A2001:FDC::1/64 2001:FDC::2/64
• B2001:FDC::1/64 2001:FDC::2/64
• C2000::1ACB:D000::1/48 FFC0:28E1:2320::1/64
• DFE80::1/64 FE80::2/64

• A
  9% (3)
• B
  71% (25)
• C
  6% (2)
• D
  14% (5)

Explanation

Option B works because 2001:FDC::1/64 and 2001:FDC::2/64 are both global unicast addresses (2001:: prefix) sharing the same /64 subnet, so they can communicate directly - same network, routable, valid format.

Why the distractors fail:

• Option A appears identical to B in this transcription, but in the original exam likely differs by subnet or prefix length, placing the two hosts on different networks without a gateway configured.
• Option C is syntactically invalid - 2000::1ACB:D000::1 contains two :: abbreviations, which is illegal in IPv6 (only one :: is permitted per address); additionally, the two hosts have mismatched prefixes (/48 vs /64).
• Option D uses FE80::/10 link-local addresses, which are non-routable - they work only for on-link communication and cannot traverse a router, making them unsuitable as primary host addresses in a routed IPv6 environment.

Memory tip: Think "Global = Good for routing" - addresses starting with 2001: or 2000: are globally routable unicast; addresses starting with FE80: are link-local (local only), and any address with two :: is always wrong.

No community discussion yet for this question.