[130215] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: RIP Justification
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Brandon Kim)
Wed Sep 29 19:42:19 2010
From: Brandon Kim <brandon.kim@brandontek.com>
To: <jgreco@ns.sol.net>, <patrick@ianai.net>
Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2010 19:42:09 -0400
In-Reply-To: <201009292324.o8TNOxaP093631@aurora.sol.net>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
Thanks Joe!
You just added a new term to my vocabulary!=20
"Technical Correctness"
I think I'm going to go out of my way now to use this in the office... =3D)
> From: jgreco@ns.sol.net
> Subject: Re: RIP Justification
> To: patrick@ianai.net
> Date: Wed=2C 29 Sep 2010 18:24:59 -0500
> CC: nanog@nanog.org
>=20
> > > where the RIP protocol is useful? Please excuse me if this is the =3D
> > incorrect
> > > forum for such questions.
> >=20
> > RIP has one property no "modern" protocol has. It works on simplex =3D
> > links (e.g. high-speed satellite downlink with low-speed terrestrial =
=3D
> > uplink).
> >=20
> > Is that useful? I don't know=2C but it is still a fact.
>=20
> I once had cause to write a RIP broadcast daemon while on-site with a
> client=3B they had some specific brokenness with a Novell server and some
> other gear that was "fixed" by a UNIX box=2C a C compiler=2C and maybe 20
> or 30 minutes of programming (mostly to remember the grimy specifics of
> UDP broadcast programming). I do not recall the specific routing issue=
=2C
> but being able to just inject a periodic "spoofed" packet was sufficient
> to repair them.
>=20
> While not the correct way to engineer a network=2C sometimes being able t=
o
> bring a client's network back on-line in a crisis is more important than
> technical correctness. I feel reasonably certain that I would not have
> been able to cobble together a quick solution if they had been relying
> on OSPF=2C etc. A simple protocol can be a blessing. I concede it is mo=
re
> often a curse.
>=20
> .... JG
> --=20
> Joe Greco - sol.net Network Services - Milwaukee=2C WI - http://www.sol.n=
et
> "We call it the 'one bite at the apple' rule. Give me one chance [and] th=
en I
> won't contact you again." - Direct Marketing Ass'n position on e-mail spa=
m(CNN)
> With 24 million small businesses in the US alone=2C that's way too many a=
pples.
>=20
=
