> From: Mark Tinka <mark.ti...@seacom.mu> > Sent: Thursday, June 18, 2020 12:51 PM > > On 18/Jun/20 13:23, adamv0...@netconsultings.com wrote: > > > is the current state is not the end state, this is a pretty dynamic > > industry > that I'm sure is converging/evolving towards a v4:v6 parity, however the pace > may be, which is understandable considering the scope of ground to be > covered. > > Which I am fine with - if you give me a time line to say LDPv6, > SR-OSPFv3 and SR-ISISv6 will be available on X date, I can manage my > operation and expectations accordingly. > > But if you say, "No LDPv6, no SR-OSPFv3, no SR-ISISv6... only SRv6", then > that's an entirely different issue. > > The good news is there currently is choice on the matter, but upending > hundreds or thousands of boxes to prove that point should really be a last > resort, as there are more pressing things we all have to deal with. > Hence our current strategy is to stay on IPv4 control-plane (and IPv4 management plane) as it suits, and for the foreseeable future will suite, all our needs (which are to transport v4&v6 data packets via L2&L3 MPLS VPN services), there are simply more important projects than to experiment with v6 control-plane, like for instance perfecting/securing the v6 customer facing services (delivered over the underlying v4 signalled MPLS infrastructure, that no customer really cares about).
But I understand your frustrations case it seems like you're taking the bullet for us late adopters and in a sense you are, cause say in 10 years from now when I decide to migrate to v6 control-plane and management-plane as then it might be viewed as common courtesy, it will be all there on a silver plate waiting for me allowing for a relatively effortless and painless move. All thanks to you fighting the good fight today. > > > Yes you're right in acknowledging that we're not living in a perfect world > and that choices are limited, but it's been like that since ever yet we > managed to thrive by analysing our options and striving for optimal strategies > year by year. > > We can thank NAT44, CIDR, DHCP and PPPoE for that strategy over the years > :-). > > IPv6 is the future, and at some point, we'll have to stop hiding from it. > And I'd say the future is now, cause there is an actual need for v6 services. But need for v6 control & management plane? - It's not like operators are losing business opportunities not having that. (they might even be viewed as conservative->stable, which might be preferred by some customers). adam
