Re: [mpls] Last Call: <draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-ipv6-14.txt> (Updates to LDP for IPv6) to Proposed Standard

Mark Tinka <mark.tinka@seacom.mu> Thu, 18 December 2014 16:29 UTC

Return-Path: <mark.tinka@seacom.mu>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF30E1A911F; Thu, 18 Dec 2014 08:29:29 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.589
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.589 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HOST_MISMATCH_COM=0.311] autolearn=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id K_I10Tl5toGo; Thu, 18 Dec 2014 08:29:28 -0800 (PST)
Received: from the-host.seacom.mu (ge-1.ln-01-jnb.za.seacomnet.com [105.28.96.5]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 71E3A1A9107; Thu, 18 Dec 2014 08:27:44 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=the-host.localnet) by the-host.seacom.mu with esmtp (Exim 4.80.1) (envelope-from <mark.tinka@seacom.mu>) id 1Y1dvL-0004Ts-OQ; Thu, 18 Dec 2014 18:27:35 +0200
From: Mark Tinka <mark.tinka@seacom.mu>
Organization: SEACOM
To: "Aissaoui, Mustapha (Mustapha)" <mustapha.aissaoui@alcatel-lucent.com>
Subject: Re: [mpls] Last Call: <draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-ipv6-14.txt> (Updates to LDP for IPv6) to Proposed Standard
Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2014 18:27:31 +0200
User-Agent: KMail/1.13.6 (Linux/2.6.37.6-24-desktop; KDE/4.6.0; i686; ; )
References: <20141204193700.25973.18733.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <201412172217.41962.mark.tinka@seacom.mu> <4A79394211F1AF4EB57D998426C9340D947C3282@US70UWXCHMBA04.zam.alcatel-lucent.com>
In-Reply-To: <4A79394211F1AF4EB57D998426C9340D947C3282@US70UWXCHMBA04.zam.alcatel-lucent.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart2194590.b14FHuCpeS"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <201412181827.34972.mark.tinka@seacom.mu>
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/VqZq21MFs40zNlRs4BQ3I1NxXls
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 18 Dec 2014 08:31:18 -0800
Cc: "mpls@ietf.org" <mpls@ietf.org>, "ietf@ietf.org" <ietf@ietf.org>, IETF-Announce <ietf-announce@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
Reply-To: mark.tinka@seacom.mu
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2014 16:29:30 -0000

On Thursday, December 18, 2014 05:38:16 PM Aissaoui, 
Mustapha (Mustapha) wrote:

> Hi Mark,
> The issue will exist on a p2p link...

Yes, figured as much.

> but in that case you
> could always add a per-interface configuration knob
> which disables the dual-stack behavior and will prevent
> sending IPv6 FECs and IPv6 addresses over a session on
> that link.

Yes, easier to do on a point-to-point link compared to a 
broadcast network.

That said, I'm still for more of an MT-type solution a la 
IS-IS, so that this applies to the entire protocol. This 
way, operators do not have to fuff around with yet-another-
knob (until they really have to).

Any thoughts around this?

Cheers,

Mark.