On 2011-01-09 17:40, Jason Lixfeld wrote:
We're in the the process of turning up an MPLS network using ASR9ks
> and ME3600s. We're looking to get away from L2 and interconnect all > the devices at L3.
Wise move. > To facilitate this, we were originally going to use unnumbered on all > the PE-PE, P-P, P-PE links but we just recently discovered that BFD > isn't supported on unnumbered Gig/TenGig interfaces. Why go for unnumbered? It will be harder to troubleshoot, and the address conservation for IPv4 /30 and IPv6 /64 just doesn't make sense unless you're really short for IPs. -- "Everything will be okay in the end. | Łukasz Bromirski If it's not okay, it's not the end." | http://lukasz.bromirski.net _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
