[c-nsp] LDPv6 Census Check

[Saku Ytti]

I'm pretty sure that one or more of Mark, Gert or Tim are thinking
SR/MPLS IPv6 when they say SRv6?

No one in their right minds thinks SRv6 is a good idea, terrible snake
oil and waste of NRE. SR/MPLS IPv6 of course is terrific.

LDPv6 and SRv6 seem like an odd couple, LDPv6 SR/MPLS IPv6 seem far
more reasonable couple to choose from. I have my favorite.


On Wed, 10 Jun 2020 at 21:32, Tim Durack <tdurack at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I would take either LDPv6 or SRv6 - but also need L3VPN (and now EVPN) re-wired to use IPv6 NH.
>
> I have requested LDPv6 and SRv6 many times from Cisco to migrate the routing control plane from IPv4 to IPv6
>
> I have lots of IPv6 address space. I don't have a lot of IPv4 address space. RFC1918 is not as big as it seems. Apparently this is hard to grasp...
>
> (This is primarily IOS-XE - can't afford the IOS-XR supercars)
>
> On Wed, Jun 10, 2020 at 1:20 PM Mark Tinka <mark.tinka at seacom.mu> wrote:
>>
>> Hi all.
>>
>> Just want to sample the room and find out if anyone here - especially those running an LDP-based BGPv4-free core (or something close to it) - would be interested in LDPv6, in order to achieve the same for BGPv6?
>>
>> A discussion I've been having with Cisco on the matter is that they do not "see any demand" for LDPv6, and thus, won't develop it (on IOS XE). Meanwhile, it is actively developed, supported and maintained on IOS XR since 5.3.0, with new features being added to it as currently as 7.1.1.
>>
>> Needless to say, a bunch of other vendors have been supporting it for a while now - Juniper, Nokia/ALU, Huawei, even HP.
>>
>> IOS XR supporting LDPv6 notwithstanding, Cisco's argument is that "the world" is heavily focused on deploying SRv6 (Segment Routing). While I know of one or two questionable deployments, I'm not entirely sure much of the world is clamouring to deploy SR, based on all the polls we've done at various NOG meetings and within the general list-based operator community
>>
>> So I just wanted to hear from this operator community on whether you would be interested in having LDPv6 support to go alongside your LDPv4 deployments, especially if you run native dual-stack backbones. Or if your focus is totally on SRv6. Or if you don't care either way :-). Thanks.
>>
>> Mark.
>
>
>
> --
> Tim:>



-- 
  ++ytti