On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 8:14 AM, Victor Kuarsingh <vic...@jvknet.com> wrote: > Nanog Folks: > > Philip Matthews and I are co-authors on an active draft within the IETF > related to IPv6 routing design choices. To ensure we are gathering > sufficient data we are looking for an expanded set of input from operator > forums as well (vs. just the v6ops IETF list). The draft is found here > -(https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-v6ops-design-choices). > > We are looking for information on the IGP combinations people are running in > their dual-stack networks. We are gathering this information so we can > document in our draft which IGP choices are known to work well (i.e., people > actually run this combination in production networks without issues). The > draft will not name names, but just discuss things in aggregate: for > example, "there are 3 large and 2 small production networks that run OSPF > for IPv4 and IS-IS for IPv6, thus that combination is judged to work well". > If you have a production dual-stack network, then we would like to know > which IGP you use to route IPv4 and which you use to route IPv6.
Babel, for both. (carries both protocols in the same packet, same daemon) > We would > also like to know roughly how many routers are running this combination. In production: 28. In test (and still shared with production) anywhere from 8 to 68. Couple other smaller sites. a few thousand cerowrt boxes "out there", with some percentage having 2-3 participating nodes at least. ietf Homenet prototypes, also. > Feel free to share any successes or concerns with the combination as well. Gave up on bridging, and tried olsr, batman, ospfv3, before settling on babel. Source specific routing now a big help on 110 acre campus with multiple egress nodes. mixed (and mostly) wifi and ethernet, also, which ruled out ospf big time. multi-channel interference, which ruled out olsr (at the time). batman was layer 2 and hard to segment, and bridging 7 wifi hops did not scale at all over 802.11s nor WDS. > We are looking particularly at combinations of the following IGPs: IS-IS, > OSPFv2, OSPFv3, EIGRP. Babel config is crazy easy compared to any of these. So are packet loads. Filtering out natted addrs while still preserving e2e ipv6 connectivity, easy also. a flaw of DV is not seeing the whole picture of the network without traceroute or alternate monitoring means than the protocol itself. Still, see: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-chroboczek-babel-doesnt-care-00 Worst case, it's good for a laugh. > If you run something else (RIP?) then we would also like to hear about this, > though we will likely document these differently. [We suspect you run > RIP/RIPng only at the edge for special situations, but feel free to correct > us]. > > And if you have one of those modern networks that carries dual-stack > customer traffic in a L3VPN or similar and thus don’t need a dual-stacked > core, then please email us and brag ... > > If you are on multiple lists at RIPE, NANOG or the IETF, we appologize for > any redundant emails you may get (we are just attempting to reach the widest > audience possible). > > Philip Matthews > Victor Kuarsingh -- Dave Täht What will it take to vastly improve wifi for everyone? https://plus.google.com/u/0/explore/makewififast
