[129313] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: largest OSPF core
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Chuck Anderson)
Thu Sep 2 17:42:05 2010
Date: Thu, 2 Sep 2010 17:41:59 -0400
From: Chuck Anderson <cra@WPI.EDU>
To: nanog@nanog.org
Mail-Followup-To: nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <D338D1613B32624285BB321A5CF3DB251037180F7E@ginga.ai.net>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Thu, Sep 02, 2010 at 05:32:30PM -0400, Deepak Jain wrote:
> > > With respect to these OSPF questions, how many people are running two
> > OSPF processes on each router (v4 and v6) to support dual stack rather
> > than migrating (or just enjoying their existing) ISIS (OSI)
> > implementations?
> > >
> > You left out the option of using ospf3 to do both v4 and v6. Works on
> > juniper and foundry at least.
> >
> > Owen
>
> http://www.cisco.com/web/strategy/docs/gov/OSPFv3_aag.pdf
>
> Thank you. Apparently Cisco supports it (or something like it) too.
Seems silly to migrate your existing OSPFv2 to an extra instance of
OSPFv3, leaving 2 separate OSPFv3 instances. Why not just stick with
your existing OSPFv2 and add OSPFv3 for IPv6? Or if you want to
migrate your IPv4 IGP, go directly to IS-IS so you can have a single
link-state database, single process, etc. for both IPv4 and IPv6.
