[116830] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: OSPF vs IS-IS vs PrivateAS eBGP
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jack Bates)
Thu Aug 20 22:30:30 2009
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2009 21:29:26 -0500
From: Jack Bates <jbates@brightok.net>
To: Clue Store <cluestore@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <580af3b90908201756t7baa03d1ua361c53cc384ede2@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
Clue Store wrote:
> I couldn't agree more. Most of my staff are still under the impression in
> Cisco land that the "network 10.0.0.0 255.255.255.0" statement injects that
> network into OSPF, when it simply turns on OSPF for the interfaces that are
> in that network. I'm really glad to see Cisco that made this change in
> OSPFv3 for v6.
Cisco legacy commands make it hard on those learning fresh. I still get
annoyed when I can't use CIDR notation in a config statement. I think,
if nothing else, v6 is giving Cisco a fresh start at reimplementing some
things.
After dealing with Juniper awhile, I shifted some policies to mirror
Juniper's method of doing things. At least that sorted out some
confusion for others in the routers. Sadly, Cisco specific shortcuts
still look cleaner and easier to manage in the config, but they also
require more thought and understanding of what is going on.
Jack
