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

[Dave Taht <dave.taht () gmail com>]

On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 8:14 AM, Victor Kuarsingh <victor () 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