[lacnog] Modelo de intercambio de IPv6 & IPv4 en un IXP

[Humberto Galiza]

Hi Folks,

I work for an ISP here in Brazil and we're working on dual-stack model
(using only one vlan per client v4/v6). Ours upstream providers also works
like this. In fact, I can't see any benefit using an exclusive vlan only to
forward v6 traffic. Anybody else?

Best regards,

Galiza
Computer B.Sc. (UFBA)




2011/7/6 Saliel Figueira Filho <saliel en gmail.com>

> A menos facilidad de recoger  estadísticas del trafico IPv6 ? Si no ten mas
> que 4096 peers, no creo que los costos sean significativos...
>
> Saliel
>
> On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 7:56 PM, Carlos Martinez <
> carlosmarcelomartinez en gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Can't this accounting be performed using NetFlow or similar ?
>>
>> I am also curious whether having different VLANs result in higher
>> operational costs or not.
>>
>> Any one from PTT metro here ? how do they implement it ?
>>
>> regards
>>
>> Carlos
>>
>> On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 4:54 PM, Arturo Servin <aservin en lacnic.net> wrote:
>> >
>> >        Yep, I read it. Very good document.
>> >
>> > On 5 Jul 2011, at 16:36, Roque Gagliano wrote:
>> >
>> >> Hi,
>> >>
>> >> You may want to check RFC 5963- IPv6 Deployment in Internet Exchange
>> >> Points (IXPs)
>> >> http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc5963.txt
>> >>
>> >> Roque (who happened to author it)
>> >
>> >        I do not know that guy. =)
>> >
>> >        But I (at least me) would like to know about some experiences in
>> deployment.
>> >
>> > Thanks
>> > -as
>> >
>> >>
>> >> 2011/7/5 Arturo Servin <aservin en lacnic.net>:
>> >>>
>> >>> What are the advantages and disadvantages of the models?
>> >>> Any takers?
>> >>> Thanks!
>> >>> .as
>> >>> On 5 Jul 2011, at 16:14, Gustavo Santos wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> Here in Brazil the PTT-METRO  ( A public brazilian NAP) uses on vlan
>> for
>> >>> each kind of traffic ( one for v4 and one for v6)
>> >>>
>> >>> Gustavo Santos
>> >>> Analista de Redes
>> >>> CCNA , MTCNA , MTCRE, MTCINE, JUNCIA-ER
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> 2011/7/5 NAP COLOMBIA <admonnap en ccit.org.co>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Buenos dias.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Actualmente estamos desarrollando el proceso de incluir tráfico IPv6
>> en
>> >>>> nuestro NAP y estamos discutiendo cuál de los modelos de conexión es
>> el mas
>> >>>> beneficioso.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> El primero sería usar una VLAN con dual-stack y el otro modelo sería
>> la
>> >>>> creación de una nueva VLAN exclusiva para el tráfico IPv6, de tal
>> manera que
>> >>>> los dos tráficos (IPv4 e IPv6) queden separados.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> ¿Qué modelo se ha usado en los NAP de la región? y ¿Qué razones los
>> >>>> llevaron a tomar esa decisión?
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Saludos,
>> >>>> Héctor Tamayo
>> >>>> NAP COLOMBIA
>> >>>> --
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> _______________________________________________
>> >>>> LACNOG mailing list
>> >>>> LACNOG en lacnic.net
>> >>>> https://mail.lacnic.net/mailman/listinfo/lacnog
>> >>>>
>> >>>
>> >>> _______________________________________________
>> >>> LACNOG mailing list
>> >>> LACNOG en lacnic.net
>> >>> https://mail.lacnic.net/mailman/listinfo/lacnog
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> _______________________________________________
>> >>> LACNOG mailing list
>> >>> LACNOG en lacnic.net
>> >>> https://mail.lacnic.net/mailman/listinfo/lacnog
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> At least I did something
>> >> Don Draper - Mad Men
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> LACNOG mailing list
>> >> LACNOG en lacnic.net
>> >> https://mail.lacnic.net/mailman/listinfo/lacnog
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > LACNOG mailing list
>> > LACNOG en lacnic.net
>> > https://mail.lacnic.net/mailman/listinfo/lacnog
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> ========================
>> Carlos M. Martinez-Cagnazzo
>> http://cagnazzo.name
>> ========================
>> _______________________________________________
>> LACNOG mailing list
>> LACNOG en lacnic.net
>> https://mail.lacnic.net/mailman/listinfo/lacnog
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> LACNOG mailing list
> LACNOG en lacnic.net
> https://mail.lacnic.net/mailman/listinfo/lacnog
>
>
------------ próxima parte ------------
Se ha borrado un adjunto en formato HTML...
URL: <https://mail.lacnic.net/pipermail/lacnog/attachments/20110729/5ca83111/attachment.html>