IPv6: IS-IS or OSPFv3

Mark Tinka mtinka at globaltransit.net
Tue Dec 30 18:21:41 CST 2008


On Wednesday 31 December 2008 03:14:13 am Roque Gagliano 
wrote:

> at least in my case, I did turned ISISv6 in one WAN
> interface where the router on the other side (a Cisco)
> did not have the "ipv6 unicast routing" general command
> on and the isis adjacency went down completely. So, yes
> that was an issue.

One of the things I'm hoping Cisco can fix in not-too-
distant future releases of IOS.

> But if you enabled IPv6 in both ends
> first and then one interface at the time, it worked.

What we saw on our test segment was that v4 adjacencies were 
not torn down by merely enabling IS-ISv6 on an interface 
(given that JunOS enables IS-ISv6 by default when IS-IS is 
enabled on the router; in IOS, you have to explicitly turn 
IS-ISv6 on).

v4 adjacencies were torn down *after* an IPv6 address was 
added to the interface. We witnessed this issue under both 
IOS and JunOS.

Cheers,

Mark.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 835 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20081231/81dc34b7/attachment.bin>


More information about the NANOG mailing list