[126612] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Quick IP6/BGP question
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Andy Davidson)
Mon May 24 14:51:15 2010
From: Andy Davidson <andy@nosignal.org>
In-Reply-To: <FA2E47FFA50291418803D2E7C1DF07F30B4ED3F8@SDEXCL01.Proflowers.com>
Date: Mon, 24 May 2010 19:50:58 +0100
To: Thomas Magill <tmagill@providecommerce.com>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On 24 May 2010, at 19:21, Thomas Magill wrote:
> =46rom the provider side, are most of you who are implementing IP6
> peerings running BGP over IP4 and just using IP6 address families to
> exchange routes or doing IP6 peering?
Different sessions, one for v4, one for v6. This keeps config saner, =
therefore debugging easier. It means you can split out your v4 and v6 =
edge in the future should you want to, without having to renumber and =
split out the sessions then.
Thanks
Andy=
