Re: [v6ops] Looking for info on IGP choices in production dual-stack networks

Mark ZZZ Smith <> Fri, 05 June 2015 02:54 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id BA6621B29DD for <>; Thu, 4 Jun 2015 19:54:40 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 3.802
X-Spam-Level: ***
X-Spam-Status: No, score=3.802 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, FROM_LOCAL_NOVOWEL=0.5, HK_RANDOM_ENVFROM=0.001, HK_RANDOM_FROM=1, HK_RANDOM_REPLYTO=0.999, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, J_CHICKENPOX_74=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001] autolearn=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id VIvoBPjHSai4 for <>; Thu, 4 Jun 2015 19:54:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A1CD11B29DA for <>; Thu, 4 Jun 2015 19:54:38 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=s2048; t=1433472877; bh=ODnQgbFPZgEqNRlHrZCrvAnkUPzlwz6/ozvUVq5N9MA=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:From:Subject; b=SJ/b6Kofe6PVrXC3pOZOr7RiwmnworIH06iYpqWS6iC3r8oRzdKpBk+GYtuFkDYiSC4B/DINByWztkCYxZ0dvkpzPpKN42rXa0e7CYRN2DZwzS3bNBlG5mDwNi4T8ErB9lWqf5aYuZJkzFb7jVmdrUmAtm7A7I8X1v2d3NoMvs9BSHhB6UzT1mwOTepuzqRh32SMWzrHL5YmHTPLxgmOHIKg+hjXvqJDI/4TutdOXOkjQstTslllyK1g8AWHPUeurFSWZaRoZmLG0WyVKj0+JEEOtL/Jovl+dzKzKPdwMDyYkHO2gDwIFJS2qmQGhOZzW/+8wX031fB0G+XEG7y3OA==
Received: from [] by with NNFMP; 05 Jun 2015 02:54:37 -0000
Received: from [] by with NNFMP; 05 Jun 2015 02:54:37 -0000
Received: from [] by with NNFMP; 05 Jun 2015 02:54:37 -0000
X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3
X-YMail-OSG: lJLT8_4VM1ksvxOiwxtxQP5QI31q9XWZvI8XKurtmqy6LuHABFk6cldez6eFjXH TchLeQgfMKTBLu0eux.bjNZ7jWmDDUguJALFkQes2AK8bXHZDTCXRPSd2HF5MVK8BxtIOr1r4G5K szPAWvl0xGTkbJ63Es7eoU_ak7DkaObRdYZtlFKCFeztmJlxVlAvR1fRliZ5lQ02byVMiDmrh0kN ErELnQKoNGrJDZF2.JKuahgIB5fEIPU2AETt0FOIilSN0VuAdioeXGaC1c7oeQwhBmVnC_o6S9FA jRVaKJb9YpK0PlIRdUQHE1GTAF09VZKKHZnvS_SlPfNz6Nq028hVn2Hwrh.1Ky.27temtiEiRHLK VkBku5OC3EAZGXZgNJjJQJDOWGkZfNF1ty.pfgWnjdw2BHs0tL1.SMTApH.VjkGfd6.N60d1LrOC krQDIGx7gIJyRG6rw_qrZEg6BOB2ljEeO9ut7myPkxOd8TjN9qX4vn4FKZK_ZASty6lCp5AvHfnc K3MpQY6HorNThrAiOEioU5iOeVZ5Koa1Nqh3mkI.n0H.YsNQ8tA--
Received: by; Fri, 05 Jun 2015 02:54:06 +0000
Date: Fri, 5 Jun 2015 02:54:04 +0000 (UTC)
From: Mark ZZZ Smith <>
To: Philip Matthews <>, v6ops list <>
Message-ID: <>
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_6562636_870794964.1433472844573"
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] Looking for info on IGP choices in production dual-stack networks
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
Reply-To: Mark ZZZ Smith <>
List-Id: v6ops discussion list <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 05 Jun 2015 02:54:40 -0000

      From: Philip Matthews <>
 To: v6ops list <> 
 Sent: Friday, 5 June 2015, 0:53
 Subject: [v6ops] Looking for info on IGP choices in production dual-stack networks
Victor and I 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 Design Choices 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 5 large production networks that run OSPF for IPv4 and IS-IS for IPv6, thus that combination is judged to work well". / I don't think this is really a good thing to be stating in such abstract terms, that is, at the IGP protocol level. I'd think the successful co-existence or not of IGPs, assuming the protocols themselves aren't broken (e.g., by using the same field value id for two different things), is  implementation dependent, and dependent on which specific revision of the implementation a network has chosen to deploy, and how that network has chosen to deploy it. For example, a literally perfect implementation of OSPF + IS-IS might be "judged to work badly" if deployed badly (by, for example, putting too many routers in the backbone area, overloading control plane resources.) 
/ I'm wondering a bit what the fundamental question trying to be being answered is? Is it to try to capture some information on the current popularity of various IGPs used to carrying IPv6 routes, and how popular the use of a single IGP to carry both IPv4 and IPv6 routes is?   What particular question or questions would the reader have that this text is trying to provide an answer for?
/ Regards,Mark.

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.  We would also like to know roughly how many routers are running this combination. Feel free to share any successes or concerns with the combination as well.   We are looking particularly at combinations of the following IGPs:  IS-IS, OSPFv2, OSPFv3, EIGRP.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 ...
v6ops mailing list