Hi, for your MPLS backbone you still could reserve a few IPv4 addresses to use. The first place where you won't have enough addresses will be at your costumer's side. (All ISP has more costumers than backbone routers) Do you know while the Broadband Forum has no clear ideas even now how to support IPv6? This is a bit more important question, I think... Best, Geza On 9/8/09, ipv6-wg-request@ripe.net <ipv6-wg-request@ripe.net> wrote:
Send ipv6-wg mailing list submissions to ipv6-wg@ripe.net
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://www.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/ipv6-wg or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to ipv6-wg-request@ripe.net
You can reach the person managing the list at ipv6-wg-admin@ripe.net
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of ipv6-wg digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: Re: LDP over Ipv6 (Isacco Fontana) 2. Re: Re: LDP over Ipv6 (Gert Doering) 3. Re: Re: LDP over Ipv6 (Mark Tinka)
--__--__--
Message: 1 Date: Mon, 07 Sep 2009 17:36:13 +0200 From: Isacco Fontana <isacco.fontana@trentinonetwork.it> To: mtinka@globaltransit.net CC: ipv6-wg@ripe.net Subject: Re: [ipv6-wg] Re: LDP over Ipv6
This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------010708050001040605090703 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Do you think we can start discussion with big vendors (Cisco/Juniper) ?
Mark Tinka ha scritto:
On Monday 07 September 2009 05:06:47 am Isacco Fontana=20 wrote:
=20
I think this (LPD over ipv6) is not a customer (isp/carrier) demand but a real problem when RIRs stop to allocate ipv4 addresses. How ISP/Carriers can build a new mpls backbone If big vendor not support the IPv6 over LDP and isp can't make request for new ipv4 blocks ? =20
Given how much money vendors are making from MPLS, it might=20 be safe to say they'll have support for it when v4 runs out.=20 The only question is which customer will be big enough for=20 them to get it in there :-).
My main concern is, given how much traffic is being carried=20 by MPLS today (for better or worse), the earlier vendors put=20 out native support for it in v6, the quicker bugs can be=20 worked out. Even if support became available today, I'd=20 probably feel safer not deploying it at least 3 releases=20 from when it's launched, looking at the current state of v6=20 debug (or lack thereof) for folk that have deployed it.
Cheers,
Mark. =20
--=20
Ing. Isacco Fontana
Trentino Network s.r.l. A socio Unico
Direzione Servizi Responsabile Area Ingegneria di Rete
Via Gilli, 2 - 38100 TRENTO Tel (+39) 0461.020200 Fax (+39) 0461.020201
-------------------------------------------------------------------------= -------------------------------------------------------
Cap. Soc. sottoscritto =A4 7.573.248,00 i.v. - REG. IMP. C.F. e P. IVA 0= 1904880224 E-mail: sede@trentinonetwork.it Societ=E0 soggetta a direzione e controllo da parte della Provincia Auton= oma di Trento. C.F. e P. IVA 00337460224
-------------------------------------------------------------------------= -------------------------------------------------------
--------------010708050001040605090703 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-15 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"> <html> <head> <meta content=3D"text/html;charset=3DISO-8859-15" http-equiv=3D"Content-Type"> </head> <body bgcolor=3D"#ffffff" text=3D"#000000"> Do you think we can start discussion with big vendors (Cisco/Juniper) ?<b= r> <br> Mark Tinka ha scritto: <blockquote cite=3D"mid:200909071256.17702.mtinka@globaltransit.net" type=3D"cite"> <pre wrap=3D"">On Monday 07 September 2009 05:06:47 am Isacco Fontana=20 wrote:
</pre> <blockquote type=3D"cite"> <pre wrap=3D"">I think this (LPD over ipv6) is not a customer (isp/carrier) demand but a real problem when RIRs stop to allocate ipv4 addresses. How ISP/Carriers can build a new mpls backbone If big vendor not support the IPv6 over LDP and isp can't make request for new ipv4 blocks ? </pre> </blockquote> <pre wrap=3D""><!----> Given how much money vendors are making from MPLS, it might=20 be safe to say they'll have support for it when v4 runs out.=20 The only question is which customer will be big enough for=20 them to get it in there :-).
My main concern is, given how much traffic is being carried=20 by MPLS today (for better or worse), the earlier vendors put=20 out native support for it in v6, the quicker bugs can be=20 worked out. Even if support became available today, I'd=20 probably feel safer not deploying it at least 3 releases=20 from when it's launched, looking at the current state of v6=20 debug (or lack thereof) for folk that have deployed it.
Cheers,
Mark. </pre> </blockquote> <br> <br> <pre class=3D"moz-signature" cols=3D"72">--=20
Ing. Isacco Fontana
Trentino Network s.r.l. A socio Unico
Direzione Servizi Responsabile Area Ingegneria di Rete
Via Gilli, 2 - 38100 TRENTO Tel (+39) 0461.020200 Fax (+39) 0461.020201
-------------------------------------------------------------------------= -------------------------------------------------------
Cap. Soc. sottoscritto =A4 7.573.248,00 i.v. - REG. IMP. C.F. e P. IVA 0= 1904880224 E-mail: <a class=3D"moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href=3D"mailto:s= ede@trentinonetwork.it">sede@trentinonetwork.it</a> Societ=E0 soggetta a direzione e controllo da parte della Provincia Auton= oma di Trento. C.F. e P. IVA 00337460224
-------------------------------------------------------------------------= -------------------------------------------------------</pre> </body> </html>
--------------010708050001040605090703--
--__--__--
Message: 2 Date: Mon, 7 Sep 2009 17:39:12 +0200 From: Gert Doering <gert@space.net> To: Isacco Fontana <isacco.fontana@trentinonetwork.it> Cc: mtinka@globaltransit.net, ipv6-wg@ripe.net Subject: Re: [ipv6-wg] Re: LDP over Ipv6
Hi,
On Mon, Sep 07, 2009 at 05:36:13PM +0200, Isacco Fontana wrote:
Do you think we can start discussion with big vendors (Cisco/Juniper) ?
Of course. Go to your vendor, tell him "we are not going to buy your gear if you are not shipping LDP-over-IPv6"!
If you're waving with enough money, they might even listen. But as long as everybody is just grumbling to himself, the vendors might truthfully say "noone has asked yet".
Gert -- Total number of prefixes smaller than registry allocations: 128645
SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) Tel: +49 (89) 32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279
--__--__--
Message: 3 From: Mark Tinka <mtinka@globaltransit.net> Reply-To: mtinka@globaltransit.net Organization: Global Transit International To: Isacco Fontana <isacco.fontana@trentinonetwork.it> Subject: Re: [ipv6-wg] Re: LDP over Ipv6 Date: Tue, 8 Sep 2009 09:08:11 +0800 Cc: ipv6-wg@ripe.net
--nextPart1744977.BctdEMcGiX Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline
On Monday 07 September 2009 11:36:13 pm Isacco Fontana=20 wrote:
Do you think we can start discussion with big vendors (Cisco/Juniper) ?
Gert is right, the more we "collectively" speak to our=20 vendors, the quicker they will likely implement the=20 technology (it's not new, it's already been documented).
=46or instance, I've been pushing Cisco and Juniper for an=20 MPLS control plane for v6 for nearly 2 years now, but this=20 isn't enough. Vendors tend to listen if:
a) there is a collective.
or
b) as Gert and myself have already mentioned, you're waving wads of cash their way.
Cheers,
Mark.
--nextPart1744977.BctdEMcGiX Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux)
iQIcBAABAgAGBQJKpa57AAoJEGcZuYTeKm+GhrgQAKRZt6scEjKCuwXqcJizc4AX bv5D27EYduzotX1POj1PM/VCQmt/PunMZJ9V0BIyYiNKu2k7tR+x7+Ki/kM0GrvZ Bhj2vyXyXCOx41DFfL8Qrj3htJolNTj5cLbuxSq/F5NmgD2XsqxtbOd+orGLu4Ch BzJG1/Rf+sotzobSVmrOB+47LCNrAbXYLH2MseFFw/JeMQUK+7XOX7gqx8V5qtjs Sm8ovQEoYvguelW79mZxwH35SeGZO44m2SJnJxX8o21GG+jiN6PY1q3haJO10ycN dg7ZKic2r9g9h40T6ajeCCI5zgGXRUzrXJ9eXCaAbaxJfuKt/dOzdYBDwCkldYmo 9sFQKkNmTzV/4uPDlrxPPfLEtlQUdcXqQVdjeWqoGPOdrLCZlV+GrpjZKBB5Qm9H pR7TnxP8e1YVk4s+SqCW0f09PRn0Z+LJOonYyRHN9266WduNRfMcm+MNomRkeIlN fNl9aDAPer2tzrxbLTbUN+fPMNZJy32FwLuoumkQ80ts9q1/YVweb5pODPwlrBEk 4lxQusghMw8Kx9CXk2TaZ9MzOFr7KXrOa+j6r+RBBjhIJDDrQcj96LVnBmfV4Mn2 z1DuK4SzOF1NuCVgy3tJzSybYneJpf1bkB5gIL50nngBlnjV36CWSEyObjdxUE4n dED+kJlqDSaPTMwobLp3 =xvej -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--nextPart1744977.BctdEMcGiX--
End of ipv6-wg Digest