nanog mailing list archives
Re: IGPs in use
From: Jerry Scharf <scharf () vix com>
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 09:48:27 -0700
Sean, A fine practical analysis of the two. One thing about IS-IS that is quite different from OSPF and all the other IGPs is that the neighbor traffic is not in IP but instead is done at layer 2. Some say this is a good thing. I have never run into a case where I couldn't get it to do what I wanted, but always suspected there would be. Would this force ATM links to move to the less efficient SNAP based encoding (if so, there's 4% of your bandwidth)? jerry
Current thread:
- Re: IGPs in use, (continued)
- Message not available
- Re: IGPs in use Henk Smit (Oct 14)
- Re: IGPs in use Danny McPherson (Oct 12)
- Re: IGPs in use Danny McPherson (Oct 12)
- Re: IGPs in use Danny McPherson (Oct 13)
- Re: IGPs in use I Am Not An Isp (Oct 13)
- Re: IGPs in use Paul G. Donner (Oct 13)
- Re: IGPs in use Danny McPherson (Oct 13)
- Re: IGPs in use Forrest W. Christian (Oct 14)
- Re: IGPs in use Sean M. Doran (Oct 14)
- Re: IGPs in use bmanning (Oct 14)
- Re: IGPs in use Jerry Scharf (Oct 14)
- Re: IGPs in use Tony Li (Oct 14)
- Re: IGPs in use Tony Li (Oct 14)
- Re: IGPs in use Sean M. Doran (Oct 14)
- Re: IGPs in use Henk Smit (Oct 14)
- Re: IGPs in use Tony Li (Oct 14)
- Re: IGPs in use Sean M. Doran (Oct 14)
- Re: IGPs in use Vince Fuller (Oct 14)
- Re: IGPs in use Tony Li (Oct 14)
- Re: IGPs in use alex (Oct 15)
- Re: IGPs in use Paul Ferguson (Oct 16)