nanog mailing list archives
Re: AT&T NYC
From: alex () yuriev com
Date: Mon, 2 Sep 2002 16:00:58 -0400 (EDT)
Has anybody mentioned the benefits of ISIS as an IGP to them.Link-state protocols are evil, and when they break, they *really* break. I still do not see a compeling argument for not using BGP as your IGP.Convergence time?
What is better - relatively long convergence time on affected routes or a problem on unaffected route? Ask your customers. They do not care if someone else is having a problem. They care that they dont.
With link-state, one interface flap can mean doing SPF on every route. If "every route" is only a couple hundred, rather than 100K, you fareAs you say disable synchronization and try and control the physical reach of your igp by some mechanism.. areas, summaries, ASes etc
Which is exactly what you are doing when you inject nailed routes into bgp. So, why do you need IGP such as OSPF again? Alex
Current thread:
- Re: AT&T NYC bdragon (Sep 02)
- Re: AT&T NYC Petri Helenius (Sep 02)
- Re: AT&T NYC Stephen J. Wilcox (Sep 02)
- Re: AT&T NYC alex (Sep 02)
- Re: AT&T NYC bdragon (Sep 02)
- Re: AT&T NYC alex (Sep 02)
- Re: AT&T NYC Clayton Fiske (Sep 03)
- Re: AT&T NYC alex (Sep 03)
- Re: AT&T NYC Jesper Skriver (Sep 03)
- Re: AT&T NYC Iljitsch van Beijnum (Sep 03)
- Re: AT&T NYC Jesper Skriver (Sep 03)
- Re: AT&T NYC alex (Sep 02)
- Re: AT&T NYC bdragon (Sep 03)
- Re: AT&T NYC Iljitsch van Beijnum (Sep 03)
- Re: AT&T NYC alex (Sep 03)