In the past, and rumblings now, there was some push to enable ISIS over IPV6.
Independent of Homenet, I think the investigation will continue. John On 5/31/14, 8:42 AM, "Gert Doering" <[email protected]> wrote: >Hi, > >On Sat, May 31, 2014 at 11:41:33AM +0000, Liubing (Leo) wrote: >> 1) Is it necessary to enforce only one routing protocol? >> If HNCP is adopted, I guess multiple routing protocols could be easily >>supported ? >> I think it might be more flexible if homenet router support multiple >>routing protocols. Is there any harm? >> (Note: supporting multiple routing protocols here doesn't mean they >>need run at the same time, just more choices.) > >"More protocols" means "more interoperability testing" and "more >combinations >of vendor products that suddenly do not interoperate, even if they >should". > >So I'd keep the list of supported protocols as small as possible - and >stick >to IP protocols. ISIS is great for ISP environments, but does not nicely >adapt to a unix environment where the kernel has no idea about ISO/OSI >protocols and you have to do everything via raw sockets. Which would be >a fairly typical environment for a CPE router. > >Gert Doering > -- NetMaster >-- >have you enabled IPv6 on something today...? > >SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard >Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. >Grundner-Culemann >D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) >Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279 > >_______________________________________________ >homenet mailing list >[email protected] >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet _______________________________________________ homenet mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
