On 10/Jun/20 20:29, Tim Durack wrote: > I would take either LDPv6 or SRv6 - but also need L3VPN (and now EVPN) > re-wired to use IPv6 NH.
At the moment, LDPv6 doesn't have what I call "service" support, i.e., l3vpn's, l2vpn's, MPLSv6-TE, mLDP, CsC, e.t.c. To be honest, I don't mind those so much on my end because you can still run a BGP-free core and still deliver those services. Granted, if your goal is a single-stack MPLS-based IPv6 network, then yes, it would be good for LDPv6 to support the "services". But if it's just vanilla MPLSv6 switching you're after, then LDPv6 will do just fine. > > I have requested LDPv6 and SRv6 many times from Cisco to migrate the > routing control plane from IPv4 to IPv6 Well, according to them, SRv6 is winning customers over, and nobody wants LDPv6. Then again, they have LDPv6 in IOS XR; figures. > > I have lots of IPv6 address space. I don't have a lot of IPv4 > address space. RFC1918 is not as big as it seems. Apparently this is > hard to grasp... > > (This is primarily IOS-XE - can't afford the IOS-XR supercars) LDPv6 must be a business case :-). Well, wonder how they sell so many CGN's, then :-). Mark. _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/