nanog mailing list archives
Re: RIP Justification
From: Jack Bates <jbates () brightok net>
Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2010 15:58:21 -0500
On 9/30/2010 3:32 PM, Jack Carrozzo wrote:
When was the last time you ran into a younger neteng designing his topology who went "Yes! IS-IS!"? It works fine (very well in fact) but it's just less used.
Which makes no sense to me. I originally looked at both and thought OSPF to be inferior to IS-IS. That being said, OSPF is supported on more (and cheaper) hardware. IS-IS can have additional licensing with some hardware (where OSPF does not) and is often considered a "service provider" protocol by vendors.
Jack
Current thread:
- Re: RIP Justification, (continued)
- Re: RIP Justification Jack Bates (Sep 30)
- Re: RIP Justification John Kristoff (Sep 30)
- Re: RIP Justification Jack Carrozzo (Sep 30)
- Re: RIP Justification Glen Kent (Sep 30)
- Re: RIP Justification Scott Morris (Sep 30)
- RE: RIP Justification George Bonser (Sep 30)
- Re: RIP Justification Marshall Eubanks (Sep 30)
- Re: RIP Justification Jack Carrozzo (Sep 30)
- Re: RIP Justification Jack Carrozzo (Sep 30)
- RE: RIP Justification Nathan Eisenberg (Sep 30)
- Re: RIP Justification Jack Carrozzo (Sep 30)
- Re: RIP Justification Jack Bates (Sep 30)
- Re: RIP Justification Jack Carrozzo (Sep 30)
- Re: RIP Justification Heath Jones (Sep 30)
- Re: RIP Justification Jack Carrozzo (Sep 30)
- Re: RIP Justification Heath Jones (Sep 30)