nanog mailing list archives
Re: IPv6: IS-IS or OSPFv3
From: Randy Bush <randy () psg com>
Date: Sun, 28 Dec 2008 09:23:11 -0500
In practice, we realized that enabling IS-ISv6 on interfaces already running IS-ISv4 was problematic without MT pre- configured. Those links surely lost IS-IS adjacency which threatened stability of the network.Yup, that is the rub: if rolling out your v6 routing impacts your v4 routing you are not "winning".
this is not very deep.mark did point out how to avoid it, pointing out why mt was very useful as opposed to just another bell and whistle. during a transition, in fact, topologies are not congruent due to inability to have a flag millisecond, a very very useful observation.
randy
Current thread:
- Re: IPv6: IS-IS or OSPFv3, (continued)
- Re: IPv6: IS-IS or OSPFv3 Adam Armstrong (Dec 27)
- RE: IPv6: IS-IS or OSPFv3 TJ (Dec 28)
- Re: IPv6: IS-IS or OSPFv3 Kevin Oberman (Dec 26)
- Re: IPv6: IS-IS or OSPFv3 devang patel (Dec 26)
- Re: IPv6: IS-IS or OSPFv3 Mark Tinka (Dec 27)
- Re: IPv6: IS-IS or OSPFv3 Randy Bush (Dec 27)
- Re: IPv6: IS-IS or OSPFv3 Mikael Abrahamsson (Dec 27)
- Re: IPv6: IS-IS or OSPFv3 Randy Bush (Dec 27)
- Re: IPv6: IS-IS or OSPFv3 Mark Tinka (Dec 27)
- RE: IPv6: IS-IS or OSPFv3 TJ (Dec 28)
- Re: IPv6: IS-IS or OSPFv3 Randy Bush (Dec 28)
- RE: IPv6: IS-IS or OSPFv3 TJ (Dec 28)
- Re: IPv6: IS-IS or OSPFv3 devang patel (Dec 26)
- Re: IPv6: IS-IS or OSPFv3 Roque Gagliano (Dec 30)
- Re: IPv6: IS-IS or OSPFv3 Mark Tinka (Dec 30)
- Re: IPv6: IS-IS or OSPFv3 Mikael Abrahamsson (Dec 27)
- Re: IPv6: IS-IS or OSPFv3 Joe Malcolm (Dec 27)
- Re: IPv6: IS-IS or OSPFv3 Kevin Oberman (Dec 27)
- RE: IPv6: IS-IS or OSPFv3 TJ (Dec 27)
- Re: IPv6: IS-IS or OSPFv3 Martin List-Petersen (Dec 27)