nanog mailing list archives

Re: IPv6 Management


From: Stan Barber <sob () academ com>
Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2018 13:19:01 -0700

I am with Owen here. If the IPv6 management is working and reliable,
maintaining the IPv4 management infrastructure should not be needed.

Certainly, the ability to get to "working and reliable" is going to depend
on a host of factors, but a good architecture and using best practices
during the deployment of the IPv6 network will make it easier.

On Thu, Aug 23, 2018 at 11:54 AM, Owen DeLong <owen () delong com> wrote:

I don’t see much difference between v6 management addresses and v4
management addresses when it comes to best practices.

I will say that if it were my network, I’d move everything internal-only
that I could to IPv6 as quickly as possible, freeing up those v4 addresses
for other purposes (or if GUA, possibly monetization while they’re still
valuable).

Once you’ve got the ability to use IPv6 management addresses, what’s the
point of maintaining legacy IPv4 management infrastructure? It’s just an
albatross of dead weight hanging around the neck of your network.

Owen


On Aug 23, 2018, at 10:14 , Justin Wilson <lists () mtin net> wrote:

We were having an interesting debate on IPV6 management on layer2
devices.  Does anyone have a best practice document they have seen for
utilizing v6 Management addresses? I know Cisco has some extensive
documentation on using v6 on their wireless products.

I know everyone has thoughts so am interested in any best practices which
have been presented to the community.  I haven’t worried about management
access on layer2 devices, as long as the layer2 devices can pass any cast,
multicast, and other things v6 needs.  However, I could see why you would
want v6 management addresses.

And go….


Justin Wilson
j2sw () mtin net

www.mtin.net
www.midwest-ix.com




Current thread: