internal routing-protocols for IPv6

[Francis Dupont]

 In your previous mail you wrote:

   > => RIPng is RIPv2 with IPv6 support. Cheap but very limited...
   
   True, but I guess this is a first step.
   At least, it's better than static routing. ;-)
   
=> it is why RIPng is heavily used as an IGP today (for instance I use
it here). As far as you know the limits it is a good choice.

   > => there are some plans about IPv6 support in the new IS-IS but not yet
   > available.
   
   If I remember correctly from the time I used this), one of the great
   things about ISIS, is that you can use a single routing-protocol to carry
   both OSI and IPv4 routing.
   
=> this is the Ships-In-the-Night argument.

   So, it would be great to use a single routing-protocol to carry both IPv4
   and IPv6 routing.
   
=> perhaps, it really depends of the topology.

   Anycase, are there any implementations of ISIS on unix-boxes. (without the
   v6-extensions, that is!)
   
=> gated has/had one. The real problem is you need a CLNS support on your
Unix box (ie. a real old 4.4 BSD).

   >    - internal BGP?
   > => *not* an IGP!
   Technically speaking not, but you could use it as a IGP (just assign a
   private AS-number to your 'customers').
   
=> iBGP is a weak part of BGP, for instance the full mesh constraint is
a real pain (and confederation/reflectors nighmares).

   Again the same remark:
   This would have the advantage to use a single routing-protocol for both
   v4 and v6 routing.
   
=> I believe no implementation really does both on the same TCP connection
even this is possible (and capabilities give a way to negociate this,
this was a target of my co-author of RFC 2545, Pedro Roque).
   
Thanks

Francis.Dupont@enst-bretagne.fr