[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

IPv6: IS-IS or OSPFv3

Subject: IPv6: IS-IS or OSPFv3
From: trejrco at gmail.com (TJ)
Date: Sun, 28 Dec 2008 09:10:44 -0500
In-reply-to: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>

>> as one who has been burned when topologies are not congruent, i gotta
>> ask.  if i do not anticipate v4 and v6 having different topologies,
>> and all my devices are dual-capable, would you still recommend mt for
>> other than future-proofing?
>
>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".


/TJ

Follow-Ups:
- IPv6: IS-IS or OSPFv3
  - From: randy at psg.com (Randy Bush)

References:
- IPv6: IS-IS or OSPFv3
  - From: devangnp at gmail.com (devang patel)
- IPv6: IS-IS or OSPFv3
  - From: mtinka at globaltransit.net (Mark Tinka)
- IPv6: IS-IS or OSPFv3
  - From: randy at psg.com (Randy Bush)
- IPv6: IS-IS or OSPFv3
  - From: mtinka at globaltransit.net (Mark Tinka)

Prev by Date: IPv6: IS-IS or OSPFv3
Next by Date: IPv6: IS-IS or OSPFv3
Previous by thread: IPv6: IS-IS or OSPFv3
Next by thread: IPv6: IS-IS or OSPFv3
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread