draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-ipv6-16

Nick Hilliard nick at foobar.org
Sun Feb 22 16:21:04 UTC 2015


On 21/02/2015 14:28, Rogers, Josh wrote:
> RFC7349 is a nice summary of everything we¹re still missing wrt MPLS and
> is relatively recent so should be close to up to date.  In addition to the
> MPLS shortcomings, it also touches on recent IGP updates:

rfc7439, not 7349:

https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7439

Nick

> 
>> 3.2.3.1.  Interior Gateway Protocol (IGP)
>>
>>   RFC 3630 [RFC3630] specifies a method of adding traffic engineering
>>   capabilities to OSPF Version 2.  New TLVs and sub-TLVs were added in
>>   RFC 5329 [RFC5329] to extend TE capabilities to IPv6 networks in OSPF
>>   Version 3.
>>
>>   RFC 5305 [RFC5305] specifies a method of adding traffic engineering
>>   capabilities to IS-IS.  New TLVs and sub-TLVs were added in RFC 6119
>>   [RFC6119] to extend TE capabilities to IPv6 networks.
>>
>>   Gap: None.
> 
> When you talk to your vendor, ask what code will support these RFC¹s.
> 
> 
> -Josh
> 
> 
> 
>> On 2/21/15, 6:00 AM, "nanog-request at nanog.org" <nanog-request at nanog.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>> Message: 1
>>> Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2015 09:00:07 -0500
>>> From: Tim Durack <tdurack at gmail.com>
>>> To: Saku Ytti <saku at ytti.fi>
>>> Cc: "nanog at nanog.org" <nanog at nanog.org>, Juniper-Nsp
>>>      <juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net>, "cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net"
>>>      <cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net>
>>> Subject: Re: draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-ipv6-16
>>> Message-ID:
>>>      <CAE_ug16FGyQXsTuyP9o+uTDhdNpGBgFE6H5EbU4TDHb73Vm1UQ at mail.gmail.com>
>>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>>>
>>> On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 6:39 AM, Saku Ytti <saku at ytti.fi> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On (2015-02-19 11:06 -0500), Tim Durack wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> What is the chance of getting working code this decade? I would quite
>>>> like
>>>>> to play with this new fangled IPv6 widget...
>>>>>
>>>>> (Okay, I'd like to stop using IPv4 for infrastructure. LDP is the last
>>>>> piece for me.)
>>>>
>>>> Is there 4PE implementation to drive IPv4 edges, shouldn't be hard to
>>>> accept
>>>> IPv6 next-hop in BGP LU, but probably does not work out-of-the-box?
>>>> Isn't Segment Routing implementation day1 IPV4+IPV6 in XR?
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>>   ++ytti
>>>>
>>>
>>> I would gladly take OSPFv2/OSPFv3/ISIS+SR over LDP, but I'm seeing that
>>> is
>>> not all that is needed.
>>>
>>> I also need some flavor of L2VPN (eVPN) and L3VPN (VPNv4/VPNv6) working
>>> over IPv6.
>>>
>>> IPv6 control plane this decade may yet be optimistic.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Tim:>
>>>
>>
> 
> 
> This E-mail and any of its attachments may contain Time Warner Cable proprietary information, which is privileged, confidential, or subject to copyright belonging to Time Warner Cable. This E-mail is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient of this E-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, copying, or action taken in relation to the contents of and attachments to this E-mail is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this E-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and permanently delete the original and any copy of this E-mail and any printout.
> 




More information about the NANOG mailing list