IPv6: IS-IS or OSPFv3
mtinka at globaltransit.net
Sat Dec 27 23:00:28 CST 2008
On Saturday 27 December 2008 09:27:05 pm Randy Bush wrote:
> 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
In practice, we realized that enabling IS-ISv6 on interfaces
already running IS-ISv4 was problematic without MT pre-
Those links surely lost IS-IS adjacency which threatened
stability of the network.
Things could probably have been easier if all routers
accepted all transition commands at the same time (or if all
routers were pre-configured and powered on at the same
time), but that's not possible.
MT allowed us to bring up individual v6 links on the same
and different routers, at different times, without bringing
down the v4 network, considering that several routers had as
many as 4 - 6 links into the core.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 835 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
More information about the NANOG