Re: Is LDPv6 dead?

My thoughts exactly, Yuri.

With 6PE/6VPE service providers can leverage their existing IPv4/MPLS
backbones, without making any changes to it. Because of this I don't think
their is a big push today.

That said I'm not really sure what the benefits would be today.

Thanks,
Steve Di Bias- CCIE #32840

On Fri, Feb 15, 2013 at 11:41 AM, Yuri Bank <yuribank_at_gmail.com> wrote:

> I've wondered about this too.I think it would be a good step to the IPv6
> migration process.
>
> My thoughts are that with an MPLS core, it doesn't really matter if you're
> using IPv4 based IGP & signalling protocols, it's not like ISPs are running
> out of /30s and Loopback addresses. With 6PE and 6VPE, there isn't much
> incentive. What would be the real benefits to the business?
>
> -Yuri
>
> On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 1:11 PM, Tom Kacprzynski <tom.kac_at_gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> > I thought someone might have more insight. I was looking at IPv6 MPLS
> > implementations and looks like all of them require IPv4 MPLS core. The
> > reason for that is that currently there is no IPv6 signaling protocol.
> > Looks like *draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-ipv6-07 *that proposed LDPv6 is expired.
> > Does anyone know what is the latest in that field. Will we be stuck with
> > dual-stack forever?
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > Tom Kacprzynski
> >
> >
> > Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
> >
> > _______________________________________________________________________
> > Subscription information may be found at:
> > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>
>
> Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html

Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
Received on Fri Feb 15 2013 - 12:37:42 ART