[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
IGP protocol
- Subject: IGP protocol
- From: toebinoz at gmail.com (Tashi Phuntsho)
- Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2018 20:49:59 +1000
- In-reply-to: <CAO1bj=bTkbWp=K3X8P6sX46=0nd9_wH6xDAPFMXmMZo6kqdjZQ@mail.gmail.com>
- References: <CAH_tYHKhrwW3hXAig5KpzsDp+TvPwPc6dWdNeukxP=3XDv0qHA@mail.gmail.com> <9578293AE169674F9A048B2BC9A081B4030D42FA0F@MUNPRDMBXA1.medline.com> <[email protected]> <CAO1bj=bTkbWp=K3X8P6sX46=0nd9_wH6xDAPFMXmMZo6kqdjZQ@mail.gmail.com>
> On 13 Nov 2018, at 6:34 pm, Aled Morris via NANOG <nanog at nanog.org> wrote:
>
> On Tue, 13 Nov 2018 at 05:54, Brandon Martin <lists.nanog at monmotha.net <mailto:lists.nanog at monmotha.net>> wrote:
> I was of the impression that there was a draft or similar for
> single-topology (IPv4+IPv6) OSPF. Did anything ever come of that?
>
>
> Juniper support IPv4 families ("realms") in OSPFv3.
Available on IOS too.
Problem for an ISP (OSPFv3 with AFs): if v6 breaks, v4 breaks too since OSPFv3 runs over v6 (even when carrying v4 AF)? Better with separate OSPFv2 and v3 instances.
â??
Tashi
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20181113/fa19c586/attachment.html>