nanog mailing list archives
Re: OSPF vs IS-IS vs PrivateAS eBGP
From: Clue Store <cluestore () gmail com>
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2009 19:56:14 -0500
Am I alone in my view that BGP is _far_ more simple and straight-forward than OSPF
that ospf has become exceedingly complex, and all that results thereof.
I couldn't agree more. Most of my staff are still under the impression in Cisco land that the "network 10.0.0.0 255.255.255.0" statement injects that network into OSPF, when it simply turns on OSPF for the interfaces that are in that network. I'm really glad to see Cisco that made this change in OSPFv3 for v6. Clue On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 6:52 PM, Randy Bush <randy () psg com> wrote:
Am I alone in my view that BGP is _far_ more simple and straight-forward than OSPFthis is a very telling statement in a number of ways. that ospf has become exceedingly complex, and all that results thereof. that both are known for their complexity. randy
Current thread:
- Re: OSPF vs IS-IS vs PrivateAS eBGP, (continued)
- Re: OSPF vs IS-IS vs PrivateAS eBGP Roland Dobbins (Aug 20)
- Re: OSPF vs IS-IS vs PrivateAS eBGP Philip Smith (Aug 20)
- Re: OSPF vs IS-IS vs PrivateAS eBGP Clue Store (Aug 20)
- RE: OSPF vs IS-IS vs PrivateAS eBGP Ivan Pepelnjak (Aug 20)
- Re: OSPF vs IS-IS vs PrivateAS eBGP Gary T. Giesen (Aug 20)
- Re: OSPF vs IS-IS vs PrivateAS eBGP Steve Bertrand (Aug 20)
- RE: OSPF vs IS-IS vs PrivateAS eBGP Ivan Pepelnjak (Aug 20)
- Re: OSPF vs IS-IS vs PrivateAS eBGP Clue Store (Aug 20)
- Re: OSPF vs IS-IS vs PrivateAS eBGP Daniel Roesen (Aug 20)
- Re: OSPF vs IS-IS vs PrivateAS eBGP Gary T. Giesen (Aug 20)
- Re: OSPF vs IS-IS vs PrivateAS eBGP Randy Bush (Aug 20)
- Re: OSPF vs IS-IS vs PrivateAS eBGP Clue Store (Aug 20)
- Re: OSPF vs IS-IS vs PrivateAS eBGP Jack Bates (Aug 20)
- Re: OSPF vs IS-IS vs PrivateAS eBGP Daniel Roesen (Aug 21)