On Tue, 2 Oct 2018 at 16:39, Mark Tinka <mark.ti...@seacom.mu> wrote: > The real-world problem we are seeing is when, for whatever reason, the > RE CPU spikes and BFD for IPv6 sneezes, we also lose IPv4 because, well, > IS-IS integrates both IP protocols.
I presume that if one were to run MT-ISIS there would be no impact to IPv4? > On 2/Oct/18 15:30, Виталий Венгловский wrote: > > > Mark, > > > > Not exactly your scenario but we had the same problems with eBGP with > > IPv6 link-local addresses on QFX10K platform. > > Dev Team had replied that rather than hardware limitation it's more of > > a "design decision" to not distribute IPv6 LL BFD sessions on PFEs, > > it's the same behaviour across the MX/QFX/PTX portfolio and there are > > no plans to change it. I'd be interested to know if BFD works OK if you use public IPv6 addresses for IS-IS adjacencies (although it's a waste of IPs, I'd still be curious). Cheers, James (not currently near the lab). _______________________________________________ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp