nanog mailing list archives
Re: [c-nsp] LDPv6 Census Check
From: Mark Tinka <mark.tinka () seacom mu>
Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2020 16:39:25 +0200
On 11/Jun/20 16:36, adamv0025 () netconsultings com wrote:
Case in point. On the other hand not sure if any of the customers would care whether LSPs are signalled over v4 as opposed to v6.
They care if your core router CPU doesn't struggle from dealing with churning BGP routes at scale, taking the network down. Not every bit of good network operation can be attributed to direct revenue. BCP-38 is a great example, and that is still poorly deployed despite being supported. Mark.
Current thread:
- Re: [c-nsp] LDPv6 Census Check, (continued)
- Message not available
- Re: [c-nsp] LDPv6 Census Check Mark Tinka (Jun 10)
- Message not available
- Re: [c-nsp] LDPv6 Census Check Mark Tinka (Jun 10)
- Message not available
- Re: [c-nsp] LDPv6 Census Check Mark Tinka (Jun 11)
- RE: [c-nsp] LDPv6 Census Check adamv0025 (Jun 11)
- Re: [c-nsp] LDPv6 Census Check Mark Tinka (Jun 11)
- Re: [c-nsp] LDPv6 Census Check Saku Ytti (Jun 11)
- Re: [c-nsp] LDPv6 Census Check Mark Tinka (Jun 11)
- Re: [c-nsp] LDPv6 Census Check Saku Ytti (Jun 11)
- RE: [c-nsp] LDPv6 Census Check adamv0025 (Jun 11)
- Re: [c-nsp] LDPv6 Census Check Mark Tinka (Jun 11)
- Re: [c-nsp] LDPv6 Census Check Mark Tinka (Jun 11)
- Re: [c-nsp] LDPv6 Census Check Mark Tinka (Jun 11)