Ah yes, I would say LDPv6 and/or SR/MPLS IPv6. SRv6 reads like a science project.
Either way, I would like to achieve a full IPv6 control plane. On Wed, Jun 10, 2020 at 2:46 PM Saku Ytti <s...@ytti.fi> wrote: > I'm pretty sure that one or more of Mark, Gert or Tim are thinking > SR/MPLS IPv6 when they say SRv6? > > No one in their right minds thinks SRv6 is a good idea, terrible snake > oil and waste of NRE. SR/MPLS IPv6 of course is terrific. > > LDPv6 and SRv6 seem like an odd couple, LDPv6 SR/MPLS IPv6 seem far > more reasonable couple to choose from. I have my favorite. > > > On Wed, 10 Jun 2020 at 21:32, Tim Durack <tdur...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > I would take either LDPv6 or SRv6 - but also need L3VPN (and now EVPN) > re-wired to use IPv6 NH. > > > > I have requested LDPv6 and SRv6 many times from Cisco to migrate the > routing control plane from IPv4 to IPv6 > > > > 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) > > > > On Wed, Jun 10, 2020 at 1:20 PM Mark Tinka <mark.ti...@seacom.mu> wrote: > >> > >> Hi all. > >> > >> Just want to sample the room and find out if anyone here - especially > those running an LDP-based BGPv4-free core (or something close to it) - > would be interested in LDPv6, in order to achieve the same for BGPv6? > >> > >> A discussion I've been having with Cisco on the matter is that they do > not "see any demand" for LDPv6, and thus, won't develop it (on IOS XE). > Meanwhile, it is actively developed, supported and maintained on IOS XR > since 5.3.0, with new features being added to it as currently as 7.1.1. > >> > >> Needless to say, a bunch of other vendors have been supporting it for a > while now - Juniper, Nokia/ALU, Huawei, even HP. > >> > >> IOS XR supporting LDPv6 notwithstanding, Cisco's argument is that "the > world" is heavily focused on deploying SRv6 (Segment Routing). While I know > of one or two questionable deployments, I'm not entirely sure much of the > world is clamouring to deploy SR, based on all the polls we've done at > various NOG meetings and within the general list-based operator community > >> > >> So I just wanted to hear from this operator community on whether you > would be interested in having LDPv6 support to go alongside your LDPv4 > deployments, especially if you run native dual-stack backbones. Or if your > focus is totally on SRv6. Or if you don't care either way :-). Thanks. > >> > >> Mark. > > > > > > > > -- > > Tim:> > > > > -- > ++ytti > -- Tim:>
