cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
cancel
955
Views
10
Helpful
10
Replies
Highlighted
Participant

IPV6 Migration - MPLS

This is regarding MPLS network migrating from IPv4 -> IPv6.

Would like to understand the basics how to achieve it & I have the below queries.

 

  1. What is the recommended & used method when Migrating from IPv4 to IPV6 on MPLS ?
  2. What will be the role of the customer & what will be role of the service provider when migrating from IPv4 to IPv6 ?
  3. What are the pre-requisites & dependencies for migrating to IPv6 & the challenges associated with it ?
  4. If the service provider network is still not ready for IPv6 is it still possible to migrate to IPv6 ?

Any reference or any case study how to be done please share.

10 REPLIES 10
Highlighted
Participant

From my understanding the below options are possible.

 

  1. IPv4 CE - CE Tunnels
  2. Native IPV6 MPLS
  3. IPv6 Provider Edge Router(6PE) over MPLS
  1. IPv4 CE - CE Tunnels  - This option to be used when the SP does not have infrastructure to support IPv6 which includes both PE & Core Edge.
  2. Native IPV6 MPLS - This option to be used when both the customer & the SP has the infrastructure to support IPv6.
  3. IPv6 Provider Edge Router(6PE) over MPLS - This option to be used when the SP PE router supports IPv6 (Core Edge runs only on IPv4)

Let me know if my above understanding is right. 

In case if the SP infrastructure is not ready for IPv6 & If i choose Pv4 CE - CE Tunnels , method what is the down side of this?

What will be the limitations & the downsides ?

 

Highlighted

Any inputs r help

Highlighted

Any help

Highlighted
Cisco Employee

> This is regarding MPLS network migrating from IPv4 -> IPv6.

 

Generally speaking, MPLS core networks do not necessarily need to migrate to IPv6 for now. You can easily support IPv6 services over current MPLS/IPv4 cores (6PE and 6VPE) and that is what most service providers do. In the other hand, delivering IPv4 services over MPLS/IPv6 is not that straightforward, as there is no support or limited support of 4PE, 4VPE and 6VPE. SRv6 is probably the way forward to provide IPv4 and IPv6 services over an IPv6 only over a service provider core network.

 

Regards,

Harold Ritter
Sr Technical Leader
CCIE 4168 (R&S, SP)
harold@cisco.com
México móvil: +52 1 55 8312 4915
Cisco México
Paseo de la Reforma 222
Piso 19
Cuauhtémoc, Juárez
Ciudad de México, 06600
México
Highlighted

Thanks.

Please help me in understanding the below. You said there are 2 options.

6PE and 6VPE

My understanding of 6PE option is that it can be used when the SP PE routers supports IPv6 (Core Edge runs only on IPv4)

If my SP PE routers does not support IPV6, then it can not be used. Is my understanding right ?

 

Also to run 6PE or 6VPE what kind of support will be required from the SP side ? 

 

If my 6PE is not the option, what is the other option ?
Is IPv4 CE - CE Tunnels the only option ?

 

Highlighted

My understanding of 6PE option is that it can be used when the SP PE routers supports IPv6 (Core Edge runs only on IPv4)

> If my SP PE routers does not support IPV6, then it can not be used. Is my understanding right ?

 

That is correct. This is also true for 6VPE.

 

Also to run 6PE or 6VPE what kind of support will be required from the SP side ? 

 

In addition to IPv6 support, it also requires MPLS support and specifically 6PE and 6VPE features support.

 

If my 6PE is not the option, what is the other option ?

 

Yes, tunnels are definitely an option, but that does not involve the SP at all. Customers can do that on their own.

 

> Is IPv4 CE - CE Tunnels the only option ?

 

If your SP devices do not support IPv6 at all, then it is pretty much the only option. It will definitely be desirable for the SP to start deploying IPv6 in order to avoid being left behind.

 

Regards,

 

 

 

 

 

Harold Ritter
Sr Technical Leader
CCIE 4168 (R&S, SP)
harold@cisco.com
México móvil: +52 1 55 8312 4915
Cisco México
Paseo de la Reforma 222
Piso 19
Cuauhtémoc, Juárez
Ciudad de México, 06600
México
Highlighted

Thanks.

 

I understand that the only option left is  IPv4 CE - CE Tunnels .

In this case would like to know what are the challenges and what are the downsides of this method ?

Is there any downside or limitations with IPv4 CE-CE tunneling solution which needs to be considered ?

Highlighted

One of the downsides would be the number of tunnels required if you have a high number of CEs and you want to mesh them all. 

 

From my point of view, it doesn't make much sense for the service provider not to support IPv6 natively in 2020.

 

Regards, 

Harold Ritter
Sr Technical Leader
CCIE 4168 (R&S, SP)
harold@cisco.com
México móvil: +52 1 55 8312 4915
Cisco México
Paseo de la Reforma 222
Piso 19
Cuauhtémoc, Juárez
Ciudad de México, 06600
México
Highlighted

Thanks.

 

One of the downsides would be the number of tunnels required if you have a high number of CEs and you want to mesh them all. 

 

Would like to know more about this. Apart from the above what are the other downsides or limitatios by going with this option of CE - CE ?
Is there any reference document or any use  case document related to this, if any one can share please.

 

 

Highlighted

> Would like to know more about this. Apart from the above what are the other downsides or limitatios by going with this option

> of CE - CE ?

 

This is what we normally refer to as an overlay network and as such has all of the advantages and disadvantages of such a solution.


> Is there any reference document or any use  case document related to this, if any one can share please.

 

I am sure there is a document out there about the advantages and disadvantages of using an overlay network. Might or might not be specific to IPv6, but as I mentioned, advantages/disadvantages would apply.

 

Regards,

Harold Ritter
Sr Technical Leader
CCIE 4168 (R&S, SP)
harold@cisco.com
México móvil: +52 1 55 8312 4915
Cisco México
Paseo de la Reforma 222
Piso 19
Cuauhtémoc, Juárez
Ciudad de México, 06600
México
Content for Community-Ad
This widget could not be displayed.