[130228] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: RIP Justification
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Chris Woodfield)
Wed Sep 29 23:20:03 2010
From: Chris Woodfield <rekoil@semihuman.com>
In-Reply-To: <035FE016D625174BA7C7A9FA83E6C17987147CE602@winexmp02>
Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2010 20:19:41 -0700
To: Jonathon Exley <Jonathon.Exley@kordia.co.nz>,
nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
I know of one large-ish provider that does it exactly like that - RIPv2 =
between POP edge routers and provider-managed CPE. In addition to the =
simplicity, it lets them filter routes at redistribution without having =
to fiddle with inter-area OSPF (or, ghod forbid, multiple OSPF processes =
redistributing between each other...)
Where folks run into trouble is vendors that decide that RIP is so =
under-utilized they don't need to fully support or QA it anymore. =
Implementations tend to be a bit more..."quirky" than OSPF or BGP =
running on the same box. And occasionally you run into the odd vendor =
that doesn't care about things like being able to adjust hello/dead =
intervals...
-C
On Sep 29, 2010, at 2:50 PM, Jonathon Exley wrote:
> RIP is useful as an edge protocol where there is a single access - =
less system overhead than OSPF.
> The service provider and the customer can redistribute the routes into =
whatever routing protocol they use in their own networks.
>=20
> Jonathon=20
>=20
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jesse Loggins [mailto:jlogginsccie@gmail.com]=20
> Sent: Thursday, 30 September 2010 9:21 a.m.
> To: nanog@nanog.org
> Subject: RIP Justification
>=20
> A group of engineers and I were having a design discussion about =
routing protocols including RIP and static routing and the =
justifications of use for each protocol. One very interesting discussion =
was surrounding RIP and its use versus a protocol like OSPF. It seems =
that many Network Engineers consider RIP an old antiquated protocol that =
should be thrown in back of a closet "never to be seen or heard from =
again". Some even preferred using a more complex protocol like OSPF =
instead of RIP. I am of the opinion that every protocol has its place, =
which seems to be contrary to some engineers way of thinking. This leads =
to my question. What are your views of when and where the RIP protocol =
is useful? Please excuse me if this is the incorrect forum for such =
questions.
>=20
> --
> Jesse Loggins
> CCIE#14661 (R&S, Service Provider)
> This email and attachments: are confidential; may be protected by
> privilege and copyright; if received in error may not be used,copied,
> or kept; are not guaranteed to be virus-free; may not express the
> views of Kordia(R); do not designate an information system; and do not
> give rise to any liability for Kordia(R).
>=20
>=20
