Re: SRv6 Capable NOS and Devices

[Colton Conor <colton.conor () gmail com>]

I agree it seems like MPLS is still the gold standard, but ideally I
would only want to have costly, MPLS devices on the edge, only where
needed. The core and transport devices I would love to be able to use
generic IPv6 enabled switches, that don't need to support LDP. Low end
switches from premium vendors, like Juniper's  EX2200 - EX3400 don't
support LDP for example.

MPLS switches are very expensive compared to enterprise switches.

On Wed, Jan 12, 2022 at 1:09 AM Mark Tinka <mark@tinka.africa> wrote:
> On 1/11/22 17:16, Colton Conor wrote:
>
> >   Has
> > anyone deployed this new technology?
>
> I have heard of a network in Uganda that is running it.
>
> The rest I've heard of are either in the lab, or some portions of their
> network under testing.
>
>
> > If building a greenfield regional ISP network, would SRv6 be a requirement?
>
> Nope! It's a problem looking for a problem.
>
>
> > My understanding is that because it's using IPv6 in the dataplane, not
> > all devices have to have SRv6 enabled. The in-between core devices
> > just have to support IPv6, but not necessarily support SRv6. This is
> > much different than traditional MPLS networks today where all devices
> > have to support MPLS/LDP correct?
>
> You'd be hard-pressed to find anything that will help you generate
> revenue that does not come with MPLS baked into the chip and code.
>
> Do you want to take the chance of where and when SRv6 may or may not be
> needed?
>
> SRv6 is Cisco trying to create a market for a problem that does not
> exist. In the process, all other vendors are forced to waste tons of
> money and time to stay in the game, when they could be fixing real
> problems and adding real value.
>
> Don't fall for the trap. Vote with your wallet, and feet. We did.
>
> Mark.