Re: Address Family Support in OSPFv3

[Vivek Dubey <[e-mail]>]

Sounds interesting, as IGP would then not depend
on "address family combinations" supported at IP
level.
How will multiple OSPFv3 instance will provide that
support?



On Wed, 11 Jun 2003 Acee Lindem wrote :
>At the last IETF, the draft draft-mirtorabi-ospfv3-AF-00.txt was
>presented. It proposes to make some protocol changes to OSPFv3 now
>in case we ever want to support multiple address families (e.g.,
>permutations of IPv4, IPv6, unicast, and multicast).
>
>The draft raised a moderate level of technical discussion (mainly
>centered on the proposal's backward compatibility mechanism). The
>big question is whether or not there is a real requirement for this?
>We all know this is done in ISIS but that doesn't necessarily mean
>there is a requirement. And if there is, could the requirement better
>be satisfied with multiple OSPFv3 instances. On the other hand, we
>really want to get the protocol changes in as early as possible if
>we ever want to support multiple address families.
>
>Comments? I have some additional considerations that I will put
>in a separate E-mail.
>
>--
>Acee

http://www.herohonda.com/karizma" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"> http://immail.rediff.com/icons/rediff_mail_gold/hhsignature_12062003.gif" width="496" height="75" border="0">