Re: OSPF -vs- ISIS

[Robert E.Seastrom <rs () seastrom com>]

"Wayne E. Bouchard" <web () typo org> writes:

> > One vendor in particular sees ISIS as "an ISP protocol" and OSPF as "an
> > enterprise protocol".  Their implementation of the latter has often gotten
> > many enterprise-oriented features (e.g. dial-on-demand link support) that
> > the other didn't, whereas the former was known for reliability because the
> > coders were admonished to touch it rarely and test the heck out of every
> > change because screwing up might break the Internet.
>
> To that end, you also need to be aware that outside of the "major"
> vendors, most don't even know what ISIS is. So if you're trying to
> integrate other vendors' equipment into your network, you may have no
> choice but OSPF.

The other edge of that sword is that letting someone outside of the
"major" vendors' OSPF (1) talk to your cloud qualifies as "risky
behavior".

                                        ---rob


(1) where "major vendors" means "widely deployed", not "widely
deployed for money".  the question is whether installing on your
network is an unspoke part of their beta testing strategy.