One of my students was watching the Building IPv6 Service Provider Core webinar and wondered whether he should use 6PE or native IPv6 transport:
Could you explain further why it is better to choose 6PE over running IPv6 in the core? I have to implement IPv6 where I work (a small ISP) and need to fully understand why I should choose a certain implementation.
The decision tree should help you answer the question: “should I use native IPv6 transport or IPv6-over-MPLS for the global IPv6 connectivity?” L2/L3 VPN services are out of scope.
Do you already have MPLS in your network?
- Yes: Do you use features like MPLS TE or FRR?
- Yes: you must use 6PE.
- No: you could run IPv6 natively. Do you run BGP (for Internet services) on all core routers?
- No: Don’t change the network design, use 6PE.
- Yes: You could run either native IPv6 or 6PE. Native IPv6 requires IPv6 deployment on all core routers. 6PE needs IPv6 only on PE routers and route reflectors.
- No: Are you willing to deploy MPLS?
- No: Forget 6PE, use native IPv6.
- Yes: Will you deploy IPv6 gradually (only on a few PE-routers)?
- Yes: Introduction of MPLS and 6PE might make sense.
- No: Forget it, doesn't make sense to introduce MPLS just for IPv6
To get an initial overview of what’s needed to deploy IPv6 in your network, watch the Service Provider IPv6 Introduction or Enterprise IPv6 – the first steps webinar. You’ll find network core design and deployment guidelines in the Building IPv6 Service Provider Core webinar; IPv6 access network design and deployment are described in the Building Large IPv6 Access Networks webinar. You get access to all four webinars (and a dozen more) with the yearly subscription.
I can review your design or you could engage our professional services team in a full-blown network design/implementation project or customized on-site training/design workshop (some global organizations already did).