Re: ipv6 ISIS - address-family ipv6 [unicast | multicast] -

From: Jonathan ZD (Nuvo25@hotmail.com)
Date: Thu Feb 10 2005 - 15:02:19 GMT-3


Tim,

There's not explanation about "unicast" keyword under ISIS section. However,
under MBGP, there's small part toward the end of the first paragraph that
explain it. Follow the link for the details.

http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/software/ios122/122cgcr/fipr_c/ipcprt2/1cfmbgp.htm#1030350

I like your idea, but it seems so difficult as everyone knows, Cisco kinda
dominate the router market.

----- Original Message -----
From: "ccie2be" <ccie2be@nyc.rr.com>
To: "Jonathan ZD" <Nuvo25@hotmail.com>; "Group Study"
<ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Sent: Thursday, February 10, 2005 8:23 AM
Subject: Re: ipv6 ISIS - address-family ipv6 [unicast | multicast] - CD-Doc
ERROR

> Jonathan,
>
> Thanks for getting back to me.
>
> You are right. Multicast is not an option - at least with the versioin of
> IOS I'm running, 12.3 something.
>
> However, unicast is an option:
>
> Rack1R6(config)#router isis TEST
> Rack1R6(config-router)#addr
> Rack1R6(config-router)#address-family ?
> ipv6 Address family
>
> Rack1R6(config-router)#address-family i
> Rack1R6(config-router)#address-family ipv6 ?
> unicast Address Family modifier
> <cr>
>
> Can you offer me any guidance on when and why I would use the unicast
> option??
>
> BTW, do you think Cisco's documentation would improve if every Cisco
> certified person stopped recommending Cisco products
>
> until the documentation improved? Personally, I don't think any about of
> ranting would do one bit of good. But, causing Cisco earnings to miss
>
> Wall Street forecasts would make a world of difference I'm sure.
>
> TIA, Tim
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jonathan ZD" <Nuvo25@hotmail.com>
> To: "ccie2be" <ccie2be@nyc.rr.com>; "Group Study" <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> Sent: Thursday, February 10, 2005 11:03 AM
> Subject: Re: ipv6 ISIS - address-family ipv6 [unicast | multicast] -
English
> translation needed
>
>
> > I'm totally agree with you on the part about how poor Cisco Docs are
> > written. So many mistakes and so vague.
> >
> > The "addres-family ipv6" command can be used for both ISIS and BGP.
There
> > should not be option "multicast" for ISIS. This option is ued for MBGP
for
> > RPF purpose when routing multicast traffic between AS.
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "ccie2be" <ccie2be@nyc.rr.com>
> > To: "Group Study" <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> > Sent: Thursday, February 10, 2005 7:46 AM
> > Subject: ipv6 ISIS - address-family ipv6 [unicast | multicast] - English
> > translation needed
> >
> >
> > > Hi guys,
> > >
> > > Does anybody understand when and why I would need to use the unicast
or
> > > multicast options in the above command?
> > >
> > > I checked the command reference and found it to be useless.
> > >
> > >
> >
>
http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/software/ios123/123cgcr/ipv6_
> > > r/ipv6_01g.htm#wp1818513
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Out of curiosity, I wonder how many other people are there that
consider
> > the
> > > Cisco documentation extremely poorly written?
> > >
> > > To me, it seems inappropriate that Cisco makes the standard for
passing
> > the
> > > lab and getting a ccie so HIGH while it's standard for
> > >
> > > it's own documentation is so LOW.
> > >
> > > I know my ranting won't do any good, but it's just a reflection of my
> > > frustration with the crappy documentation.
> > >
> > > TIA, Tim
> > >
> > >



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Mar 03 2005 - 08:51:19 GMT-3