Re: IPv6: IS-IS or OSPFv3

[Mark Tinka <mtinka () globaltransit net>]

On Wednesday 31 December 2008 03:14:13 am Roque Gagliano 
wrote:

> at least in my case, I did turned ISISv6 in one WAN
> interface where the router on the other side (a Cisco)
> did not have the "ipv6 unicast routing" general command
> on and the isis adjacency went down completely. So, yes
> that was an issue.

One of the things I'm hoping Cisco can fix in not-too-
distant future releases of IOS.

> But if you enabled IPv6 in both ends
> first and then one interface at the time, it worked.

What we saw on our test segment was that v4 adjacencies were 
not torn down by merely enabling IS-ISv6 on an interface 
(given that JunOS enables IS-ISv6 by default when IS-IS is 
enabled on the router; in IOS, you have to explicitly turn 
IS-ISv6 on).

v4 adjacencies were torn down *after* an IPv6 address was 
added to the interface. We witnessed this issue under both 
IOS and JunOS.

Cheers,

Mark.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.