[110168] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: IPv6: IS-IS or OSPFv3
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Mikael Abrahamsson)
Sat Dec 27 15:38:40 2008
Date: Sat, 27 Dec 2008 21:37:51 +0100 (CET)
From: Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se>
To: nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <d0fea3580812262056k4c447061sd562c7f5b49fe670@mail.gmail.com>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
On Fri, 26 Dec 2008, devang patel wrote:
> Thanks for pointing out other good part of having CLNS as a transport
> for ISIS as a security point!
It's also a potential hassle, where you can have IS-IS up and running, but
have IP completely hosed. With OSPF this is harder as it actually runs
over IP; no IP, no IGP adjacancy.
There is good reason why neither OSPF nor IS-IS rules the IGP world, they
both have their advantages and disadvantages. Differences are usually in
what the organisation is used to, not because one is fundamentally better
than the other.
--
Mikael Abrahamsson email: swmike@swm.pp.se
