[118351] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Maximum devices in OSPF area 0
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Matthew Petach)
Mon Oct 19 21:47:54 2009
In-Reply-To: <75cb24520910190852j79f87836ya18b84854096440f@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2009 18:46:59 -0700
From: Matthew Petach <mpetach@netflight.com>
To: Christopher Morrow <morrowc.lists@gmail.com>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org, Serge Vautour <serge@nbnet.nb.ca>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 8:52 AM, Christopher Morrow <morrowc.lists@gmail.com
> wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 11:39 AM, Serge Vautour <sergevautour@yahoo.ca>
> wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > We are looking to deploy a greenfield MPLS network with OSPF as the IGP.
> I'm told
> > OSPF areas don't play well with OSPF TED. For this reason, we are looking
> at using
>
> you said .. greenfield.. why use OSPF?
>
>
Yet another vote in favour of doing IS-IS if you're going to do a greenfield
build;
it'll make your IPv6 native rollout go *so* much more smoothly (and you
*are*
planning for IPv6 now, since it's a greenfield rollout, right?
Matt
