Re: Looking for information on IGP choices in dual-stack networks

[joel jaeggli <joelja () bogus com>]

On 6/9/15 2:00 PM, Christopher Morrow wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 4:36 PM, Joe Abley <jabley () hopcount ca> wrote:
> > On 9 Jun 2015, at 16:23, Christopher Morrow wrote:
> >
> > > On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 3:21 PM, Randy Bush <randy () psg com> wrote:
> > > > > 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.
> > > >
> > > > in one network, both ospfs.  in another is-is.  i recommend the latter.
> > > >
> > > > > We would also like to know roughly how many routers are running this
> > > > > combination.
> > >
> > > why is the question /routers/ and not /networks/ ?
> >
> > Routers makes more sense to me than networks (IGP, so one network, right?)
>
> that confuses me, the logic I mean...
>
> I suppose in a single network I'd expect to see one igp for an address
> family (ospf or ospfv3). Not "eastcoast devices do ospf (stodgy
> bastards!) and westcoast goes isis!"

At one time I had datacenter interiors that had no isis support. they
ran ospfv2 and to the extent that it was necessary in limited
application ospfv3. the datacenter border and the backbone used ISIS for
both adress families. routes were in general not redistributed between IGPs.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature