nanog mailing list archives
RE: IGP Comparison (Summary of Responses)
From: Dan Rabb <danr () stl1mail1 stl1 dbn net>
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1999 07:05:26 -0600
We should also point out that the IETF is now an OSI liason organization and can make contributions to the ISO process. Further, given the technical expertise of the folks working in the IETF, the effective death of CLNP, and the fact that a significant proportion of the systems running IS-IS are actually doing so to forward IP, any contributions made by the IETF will be taken very seriously by ISO. Regards, Tony Li IS-IS WG co-chair
Does anyone have any theoretical numbers that would indicate which protocol has a faster convergence time in a given situation? Are there any true performance diffrences? Dan Rabb Network Engineer digital broadcast network dan () dbn net
Current thread:
- Re: IGP Comparison (Summary of Responses), (continued)
- Re: IGP Comparison (Summary of Responses) Alex P. Rudnev (Jan 06)
- Re: IGP Comparison (Summary of Responses) Randy Bush (Jan 05)
- Re: IGP Comparison (Summary of Responses) Antoni Przygienda (Jan 08)
- Re: IGP Comparison (Summary of Responses) Scott Brim (Jan 08)
- Re: IGP Comparison (Summary of Responses) Sean Donelan (Jan 05)
- Re: IGP Comparison (Summary of Responses) Andrew Partan (Jan 05)
- Re: IGP Comparison (Summary of Responses) bmanning (Jan 05)
- Re: IGP Comparison (Summary of Responses) Tony Li (Jan 06)
- Re: IGP Comparison (Summary of Responses) Paul G. Donner (Jan 06)
- Re: IGP Comparison (Summary of Responses) Niels Chr. Bank-Pedersen (Jan 06)
- Re: IGP Comparison (Summary of Responses) Andrew Partan (Jan 05)
- RE: IGP Comparison (Summary of Responses) Dan Rabb (Jan 06)
- RE: IGP Comparison (Summary of Responses) Alex P. Rudnev (Jan 06)
- Re: IGP Comparison (Summary of Responses) Ehab Hadi (Jan 08)