[98951] in North American Network Operators' Group
IPv6 network boundaries vs. IPv4
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (John Osmon)
Sun Aug 26 01:57:32 2007
Date: Sat, 25 Aug 2007 23:56:29 -0600
From: John Osmon <josmon@rigozsaurus.com>
To: nanog@merit.edu
Mail-Followup-To: John Osmon <josmon@rigozsaurus.com>, nanog@merit.edu
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
Is anyone out there setting up routing boundaries differently for
IPv4 and IPv6? I'm setting up a network where it seems to make
sense to route IPv4, while bridging IPv6 -- but I can be talked
out of it rather easily.
Years ago, I worked on a academic network where we had a mix
of IPX, DECnet, Appletalk, and IP(v4). Not all of the routers
actually routed each protocol -- DECnet wasn't routable, and I recall
some routers that routed IPX, while bridging IP...
This all made sense at the time -- there were IPX networks that needed
to be split, while IP didn't need to be. DECnet was... DECnet -- and
Appletalk was chatty, but useful.
I keep hearing the mantra in my head of: "I want my routers to route, and
my switches to switch." I agree wholeheartedly if there is only one
protocol -- but with the mix of IPv4 and IPv6, are there any folks
doing things differently? With a new protocol in the mix are the
lessons of the last 10 (or so) years not as clear-cut?
