nanog mailing list archives
Re: IGP Comparison (Summary of Responses)
From: "Scott Brim" <swb () newbridge com>
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1999 14:29:16 -0500
From: Henk Smit <hsmit () cisco com>
Most of the large ISPs in the US run IS-IS as their IP IGP. In europe a number of PTTs have chosen IS-IS as the IGP for their new IP Internet backbones. That might be an indication if IS-IS is dead.
This points out the real issue. OSPF and IS-IS are close enough that other factors usually outweigh their differences. The choice of IS-IS in this case is really the result of the choice of an equipment vendor. These days at least, vendors are not chosen because they implement IS-IS. IS-IS is chosen because of some vendors' protocol implementations.
Current thread:
- Re: IGP Comparison (Summary of Responses) Scott Brim (Jan 05)
- Re: IGP Comparison (Summary of Responses) Bradley J. Passwaters (Jan 05)
- Re: IGP Comparison (Summary of Responses) Jessica Yu (Jan 06)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- IGP Comparison (Summary of Responses) Dan Rabb (Jan 05)
- Re: IGP Comparison (Summary of Responses) Henk Smit (Jan 05)
- Re: IGP Comparison (Summary of Responses) Tony Li (Jan 05)
- 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) Henk Smit (Jan 05)
- Re: IGP Comparison (Summary of Responses) Bradley J. Passwaters (Jan 05)