Discussion:
[j-nsp] IPV6 over MPLS
raf
2016-08-30 10:49:15 UTC
Permalink
Hello list,


So I have now a properly configured MPLS network with a standard
configuration :) All my traffic goes trough LSPs except the IPv6 one
which it a bit frustrating.

The actual configuration is a separate ivp6 bgp mesh. No need for inet6-vpn.

I've read that the simplest method is to use 6PE with ipv6 labeled
unicast. That's look simple, but if I understand correctly I can just
wipe all my v6 loopbacks and intercos.
Is there an alternative using my actual v6 bgp mesh, and just mapping
the v6 traffic on existing LSPs.

Can I trick with ipv6 mapped loopback enabled by 'mpls ipv6-tunneling ?
rewriting nh ?



PS :
This will certainly be my last request for a while.
I learn a lot with you guys.
Thanks for having been patient with me :)

Regards,
Alexander Arseniev
2016-08-30 12:27:03 UTC
Permalink
Hello,

If You don't care whether IPv6 packets take RSVP or LDP LSP, then You
could just enable LDPv6 everywhere (JUNOS 16.1 onwards) and save on
rewriting NHs from IPv4-mapped IPv6 to proper IPv6.

For VPNv6 You would still need NH rewriting as VPNv6 NH is still
IPv4-mapped IPv6 even if carried over BGP-over-IPv6.

HTH
Thx
Alex
Post by raf
Hello list,
So I have now a properly configured MPLS network with a standard
configuration :) All my traffic goes trough LSPs except the IPv6 one
which it a bit frustrating.
The actual configuration is a separate ivp6 bgp mesh. No need for inet6-vpn.
I've read that the simplest method is to use 6PE with ipv6 labeled
unicast. That's look simple, but if I understand correctly I can just
wipe all my v6 loopbacks and intercos.
Is there an alternative using my actual v6 bgp mesh, and just mapping
the v6 traffic on existing LSPs.
Can I trick with ipv6 mapped loopback enabled by 'mpls ipv6-tunneling
? rewriting nh ?
This will certainly be my last request for a while.
I learn a lot with you guys.
Thanks for having been patient with me :)
Regards,
--
Raphael Mazelier
_______________________________________________
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-***@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
raf
2016-08-30 13:09:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by Alexander Arseniev
Hello,
If You don't care whether IPv6 packets take RSVP or LDP LSP, then You
could just enable LDPv6 everywhere (JUNOS 16.1 onwards) and save on
rewriting NHs from IPv4-mapped IPv6 to proper IPv6.
No I only have RSVP and don't want to activate LDPv6 :)
Post by Alexander Arseniev
For VPNv6 You would still need NH rewriting as VPNv6 NH is still
IPv4-mapped IPv6 even if carried over BGP-over-IPv6.
No vpnv6 for now.


--
Raphael Mazelier

_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-***@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
Olivier Benghozi
2016-08-30 13:48:46 UTC
Permalink
If you have only RSVP-TE, you may have a look at this (inet6 shortcuts) which might be an alternative to 6PE for you:
https://forums.juniper.net/t5/TheRoutingChurn/Traffic-engineering-inet6-shortcuts-to-connect-IPv6-islands-Part/ba-p/192763 <https://forums.juniper.net/t5/TheRoutingChurn/Traffic-engineering-inet6-shortcuts-to-connect-IPv6-islands-Part/ba-p/192763>
Post by raf
Post by Alexander Arseniev
Hello,
If You don't care whether IPv6 packets take RSVP or LDP LSP, then You
could just enable LDPv6 everywhere (JUNOS 16.1 onwards) and save on
rewriting NHs from IPv4-mapped IPv6 to proper IPv6.
No I only have RSVP and don't want to activate LDPv6 :)
Post by Alexander Arseniev
For VPNv6 You would still need NH rewriting as VPNv6 NH is still
IPv4-mapped IPv6 even if carried over BGP-over-IPv6.
No vpnv6 for now.
_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-***@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
raf
2016-08-30 20:50:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Olivier Benghozi
https://forums.juniper.net/t5/TheRoutingChurn/Traffic-engineering-inet6-shortcuts-to-connect-IPv6-islands-Part/ba-p/192763 <https://forums.juniper.net/t5/TheRoutingChurn/Traffic-engineering-inet6-shortcuts-to-connect-IPv6-islands-Part/ba-p/192763>
Honestly I didn't understand well what inet6 shortcuts does.
Anyway implementing 6PE was straightforward, and all is finish and work
as expected.

--
Raphael Mazelier

_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-***@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
Olivier Benghozi
2016-08-30 13:13:53 UTC
Permalink
Hi raf,

When using the new LDP native IPv6 support, as explained in https://www.juniper.net/techpubs/en_US/junos16.1/topics/task/configuration/configuring-ldp-native-ipv6-support.html <https://www.juniper.net/techpubs/en_US/junos16.1/topics/task/configuration/configuring-ldp-native-ipv6-support.html>
you have to "Enable forwarding equivalence class (FEC) deaggregation in order to use different labels for different address families.".
So you won't be really using "existing LSPs", but parallel ones. But that's a detail :)

However, it's 16.1R1 and you'll probably need an NBC suit to approach it. And that's probably not a detail.

So I feel that currently 6PE would still be the way to go if you want to MPLSizse your IPv6 immediately within global table.

"mpls ipv6-tunneling" is mandatory for it anyway.
You would have to add bgp inet6 labelled unicast to your iBGP, remove the ipv6 interco addresses (but keep inet6 family), remove your ibgp ipv6 mesh (and transfer your ipv6 policies to the IPv4 sessions), remove your ospfv3 (or add no-ipv6-unicast to your interfaces in isis), and you can keep your ipv6 loopbacks (to make some IPv6 pings and traceroutes) as long as you redistribute them using bgp.
I guess your bgp nexthop self policy now works properly :)


Olivier
Post by Alexander Arseniev
Hello,
If You don't care whether IPv6 packets take RSVP or LDP LSP, then You could just enable LDPv6 everywhere (JUNOS 16.1 onwards) and save on rewriting NHs from IPv4-mapped IPv6 to proper IPv6.
For VPNv6 You would still need NH rewriting as VPNv6 NH is still IPv4-mapped IPv6 even if carried over BGP-over-IPv6.
HTH
Thx
Alex
Post by raf
Hello list,
So I have now a properly configured MPLS network with a standard configuration :) All my traffic goes trough LSPs except the IPv6 one which it a bit frustrating.
The actual configuration is a separate ivp6 bgp mesh. No need for inet6-vpn.
I've read that the simplest method is to use 6PE with ipv6 labeled unicast. That's look simple, but if I understand correctly I can just wipe all my v6 loopbacks and intercos.
Is there an alternative using my actual v6 bgp mesh, and just mapping the v6 traffic on existing LSPs.
Can I trick with ipv6 mapped loopback enabled by 'mpls ipv6-tunneling ? rewriting nh ?
This will certainly be my last request for a while.
I learn a lot with you guys.
Thanks for having been patient with me :)
_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-***@puck.nether.net
https://p
Saku Ytti
2016-08-30 18:46:11 UTC
Permalink
On 30 August 2016 at 15:27, Alexander Arseniev <***@btinternet.com> wrote:

Hey,
Post by Alexander Arseniev
If You don't care whether IPv6 packets take RSVP or LDP LSP, then You could
just enable LDPv6 everywhere (JUNOS 16.1 onwards) and save on rewriting NHs
from IPv4-mapped IPv6 to proper IPv6.
Obviously this is matter of opinion. But I see this as sentimental
configuration, that somehow edge services should map to core
signalling. To me it's just added complexity cost, which will manifest
itself as reduced availability.

I would decouple edge services from core signalling. I would do 6PE
until the day I forklift into IPv6 only core and do 4PE.
--
++ytti
_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-***@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
raf
2016-08-30 21:01:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by Saku Ytti
I would decouple edge services from core signalling.
The more I learn SP networks the more I think this approach is the way
to go.
Post by Saku Ytti
I would do 6PE
until the day I forklift into IPv6 only core and do 4PE.
I don't think that keeping ipv4 address in the core is a real problem.
With decoupling services from the signaling, we can even use whatever
addresses in the core. But yes when all the stacks will be primarily
developed over ipv6, then yes I will also switch. (we have some time left).

--
Raphael Mazelier

_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-***@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/jun

Loading...