Hello Aaron, That is great and so happy to hear that, is it real deployment at your live network ? MP-BGP between PE- Route Reflector, shall i modify it to allow IPv6 packet to carry ? or only at PE to work as dual stack ?
On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 12:19 AM, Aaron <[email protected]> wrote: > > Sounds like a good use for 6VPE...as I understand it, I've had to do the > following in my network to get 6vpe working... > > - enable local vrf ipv6 data structure which may include you upgrading the > vrf cli to the vrf definition to support ipv6 > - enable/activate vpnv6 neighbors within the MP-iBGP core...PE bgp > neighbors > or PE to Route Refelctor(s) > - enable the ipv6 vrf within bgp > - enable the pe-ce routing to be ipv6 capable > - enable the ipv6 protocol stack in the interfaces facing CE > > ...i had to do nothing ipv6-related to my mpls/igp core routing > environment. > Nothing. I think that's nice thing about 6vpe is that providers don't have > to do anything to the core in order to enable ipv6 over pre-existing ipv4 > (vpvn4) mpls l3vpn's... > > When you are done, a traceroute from a client transiting the 6vpe mpls > l3vpn > will look like this... notice hops 2 and 3....i think they are ipv6 > compatible ipv6 addresses (but unsure about what they are called)...anyway, > it shows the loopback router id of the mpls transit hop via the 6vpe (the > mpls l3vpn that is ipv6 enabled) > > C:\>tracert -d www.cisco.com > > Tracing route to e144.dscb.akamaiedge.net [2600:1404:8:1:9200::90] > over a maximum of 30 hops: > > 1 <1 ms <1 ms <1 ms 1234:5678:1111::1 > 2 1 ms 1 ms <1 ms ::ffff:12.34.0.3 > 3 1 ms 1 ms <1 ms ::ffff:123.123108.3 > 4 1 ms <1 ms <1 ms 2468:1234:0:8::f:8001 > 5 <1 ms <1 ms <1 ms 2468:1234:0:8::f:8000 > 6 11 ms 7 ms 7 ms 2468:1234:0:4::f:bb56 > 7 9 ms 7 ms 7 ms 2468:1234:0:4::3:0 > 8 15 ms 15 ms 15 ms 2468:1234:0:4::22 > 9 10 ms 15 ms 15 ms 1369:2468:0:8::e > 10 8 ms 8 ms 8 ms 1369:2468:0:4::83 > 11 9 ms 8 ms 8 ms 2610:18:10e::45 > 12 77 ms * 104 ms 2610:18:17:3000::2e > 13 32 ms 32 ms 32 ms 2400:8800:7f04:6::2 > 14 32 ms 32 ms 32 ms 2600:1404:8:1:9200::90 > > Trace complete. > > C:\> > > > Aaron > > -----Original Message----- > From: cisco-nsp [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of > Ahmed Hilmy > Sent: Monday, April 15, 2013 2:28 PM > To: Harold 'Buz' Dale > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [c-nsp] IPv6 Transition - IP/MPLS Backbone > > I have IPv4/ MPLS Backbone, i want to deploy IPv6 by using exist Backbone. > Yes, dual stack at PE only which it is facing to CE, but PE will face my > core as IPv4. > Please let me know if it is not clear yet ? > > Regards, > Ahmed > > > On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 8:00 PM, Harold 'Buz' Dale <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > Are you planning on providing native v6 via dual stack at the edges > > and then using 6PE to traverse your core? Maybe I am a little slow but > > it isn't clear to me exactly what you are trying to do. > > Thanks, > > Buz > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: cisco-nsp [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf > > Of Ahmed Hilmy > > Sent: Sunday, April 14, 2013 15:56 > > To: [email protected] > > Subject: [c-nsp] IPv6 Transition - IP/MPLS Backbone > > > > Hello Expert, > > > > We are planning to deploy IPv6 at our IPv4 Backbone, our PE to as Dual > > Stack and carry IPv6 packet through MPLS label. > > There are different scenarios, one of them is 6PE. > > Would you please guide me from where can i start ? > > > > Thanks, > > > > Ahmed > > _______________________________________________ > > cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] > > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp > > archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ > > > _______________________________________________ > cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp > archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ > > _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
