nanog mailing list archives
Re: RIP Justification
From: Chris Woodfield <rekoil () semihuman com>
Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2010 20:32:37 -0700
On Sep 29, 2010, at 6:14 PM, Scott Morris wrote:
But anything, ask why you are using it. To exchange routes, yes... but how many. Is sending those every 30 seconds good? Sure, tweak it. But are you gaining anything over static routes?
For simple networks, RIP(v2, mind you) works fine. You're correct that the number of advertisements sent over the wire every 30 seconds won't scale, but with today's routers and bandwidths it takes quite a lot to start to cause issues. The real nail in RIP's coffin is that with most (if not all) routers out there today, it's no more work to turn on and configure OSPF than it is to do RIP, and OSPF will help you scale much better as you go without being too complex for the simpler setups as well. As such, it really doesn't make sense to go with RIP for mere nostalgia's sake. If you have a specific reason not to run OSPF, fine, but those reasons are few and far between. -C
Current thread:
- Re: RIP Justification, (continued)
- Re: RIP Justification Chris Woodfield (Sep 29)
- Re: RIP Justification William McCall (Sep 29)
- Re: RIP Justification Mark Smith (Sep 30)
- Re: RIP Justification William McCall (Sep 30)
- Re: RIP Justification Chris Woodfield (Sep 29)
- Re: RIP Justification Mark Smith (Sep 29)
- Re: RIP Justification Julien Goodwin (Sep 29)
- Re: RIP Justification Mark Smith (Sep 29)
- Re: RIP Justification Scott Morris (Sep 30)
- Re: RIP Justification Chris Woodfield (Sep 29)
- Re: RIP Justification Scott Morris (Sep 30)
- Re: RIP Justification Yasuhiro Ohara (Sep 29)
- Re: RIP Justification Owen DeLong (Sep 30)
- Re: RIP Justification Jack Bates (Sep 30)
- Re: RIP Justification Jack Carrozzo (Sep 30)
- Re: RIP Justification Glen Kent (Sep 30)
- Re: RIP Justification Scott Morris (Sep 30)