Re: WG Review: IPv6 Operations (v6ops)

[Brian Haberman <bkhabs@nc.rr.com>]

Francis,

Francis Dupont wrote:
> 
>  In your previous mail you wrote:
> 
>    > 1) network (ISP/core) transition.  Folks who feel stuff like IGP or BGP
>    > tunneling is really needed etc.
> 
>    Is this really the case?  The large operators I have talked to don't
>    want any transition tools in their core.  They see 6to4, ISATAP, NAT-PT,
>    various tunneling mechanisms, etc. as a leaf network solution.  Their
>    core is native v6.
> 
> => this is not true for cores using MPLS where some hacks are used
> for IPv6 support (aka 6PE, etc): you can't say this is native v6...

Agreed.  And I never mentioned MPLS.  The operators I am talking about
are using BGP, IS-IS, and OSPF to route v6 natively.  Some of these
operators have MPLS in parts of their network.  But, they are not
utilizing the MPLS portion for v6 yet.

Brian