nanog mailing list archives
RE: NANOG 40 agenda posted
From: "Chris L. Morrow" <christopher.morrow () verizonbusiness com>
Date: Tue, 29 May 2007 16:16:24 +0000 (GMT)
On Tue, 29 May 2007 michael.dillon () bt com wrote:
For core links it should IMHO be mostly possible to keep them IPv4/IPv6 dual-stack.What's wrong with MPLS in the core and 6PE at the edge? Right there you have two possible tactics that are worthy of being publicly discussed and compared.stewart bamford gave a good presentation about this very thing 4 nanogs ago (or maybe 5)> There are some support issues to keep in mind of course.Perhaps it was this one? http://www.nanog.org/mtg-0510/pdf/bamford.pdf
indeed, thanks!
Note that Level3 did choose to use 6PE for their deployment rather than dual-stacking.
I think he stated that initial deployment was 6pe, but they had planned to re-deploy native v6 at a later date.
Current thread:
- RE: NANOG 40 agenda posted, (continued)
- RE: NANOG 40 agenda posted michael.dillon (May 29)
- Re: NANOG 40 agenda posted Adrian Chadd (May 29)
- Re: NANOG 40 agenda posted Iljitsch van Beijnum (May 29)
- Re: NANOG 40 agenda posted David W. Hankins (May 30)
- Re: DHCPv6 and stateless autoconf, was: NANOG 40 agenda posted Iljitsch van Beijnum (May 30)
- Re: DHCPv6 and stateless autoconf, was: NANOG 40 agenda posted David W. Hankins (May 30)
- Re: NANOG 40 agenda posted Chris L. Morrow (May 30)
- RE: NANOG 40 agenda posted Chris L. Morrow (May 29)
- RE: NANOG 40 agenda posted michael.dillon (May 29)
- RE: NANOG 40 agenda posted michael.dillon (May 29)
- RE: NANOG 40 agenda posted Chris L. Morrow (May 29)
- Re: NANOG 40 agenda posted JORDI PALET MARTINEZ (May 26)
- Re: NANOG 40 agenda posted Martin Hannigan (May 26)
- Re: NANOG 40 agenda posted Chris L. Morrow (May 26)