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

Philip Matthews <philip_matthews@magma.ca> Thu, 04 June 2015 14:53 UTC

Return-Path: <philip_matthews@magma.ca>
X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 94EEC1A1ABC for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 4 Jun 2015 07:53:49 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.801
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.801 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001] autolearn=ham
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 YMdVAc_0TP3z for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 4 Jun 2015 07:53:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from tor-smtp-03.primus.ca (mail20.primus.ca [216.254.141.187]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC05A1A1AAD for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Thu, 4 Jun 2015 07:53:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [24.114.92.221] (helo=[172.20.10.4]) by tor-smtp-03.primus.ca with esmtpa (Exim 4.84) (envelope-from <philip_matthews@magma.ca>) id 1Z0WWg-0005gT-Mz; Thu, 04 Jun 2015 10:53:47 -0400
From: Philip Matthews <philip_matthews@magma.ca>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-34--144109045
Date: Thu, 4 Jun 2015 10:53:44 -0400
Message-Id: <F41523E0-37E5-46B2-90FB-19A1FAC63DFE@magma.ca>
To: v6ops list <v6ops@ietf.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1085)
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1085)
X-Authenticated: philip_matthews - ([172.20.10.4]) [24.114.92.221]
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/kqx6wWbBpcdTRgrHlaDtzdPNKhM>
Subject: [v6ops] Looking for info on IGP choices in production dual-stack networks
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: v6ops discussion list <v6ops.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/v6ops/>
List-Post: <mailto:v6ops@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 04 Jun 2015 14:53:49 -0000

Folks:

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".
 
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 ...

Philip