[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
IPv6 routing issues
- Subject: IPv6 routing issues
- From: [email protected] (Ran Atkinson)
- Date: Wed, 9 Oct 1996 11:20:23 PDT
- In-reply-to: [email protected] "Re: 6bone map change - DIGITAL-CA/US & CISCO/US tunnels to G6/FR" (Oct 8, 10:15pm)
As of the last time I talked with the IDRP document authors, they were
indicating that they did not consider their draft fully cooked. Until they
make sufficient progress refining their draft, it seems unwise to depend on
Similarly, my (possibly outdated) understanding has been that the OSPFv3 spec
was still evolving. For example, there were some unresolved discussions about
whether the OSPFv3 spec could be changed to permit OSPFv3 to route both IPv4
and IPv6 (analagous to how Integrated ISIS works). The feature of "integrated
routing" is one that our customers are clearly asking for. Many customer
sites view integrated routing as critical to their ability to transition from
IPv4-only to IPv4+IPv6 routing.
RIP can function fine as an exterior routing protocol in many environments,
so lack of IDRP or OSPF is not necessarily an operational issue. Depending
on how well RIPng converges, network service providers might find it desirable
to work on thoughtful provisioning but that is an operational issues for such
providers to sort out among themselves if/when such providers exist.
Similarly, I'm hearing major commercial customers express dismay that IPv6
does not explicitly include support for EIDs.