[130262] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: RIP Justification
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Marshall Eubanks)
Thu Sep 30 14:37:37 2010
From: Marshall Eubanks <tme@americafree.tv>
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTikZFLU0cNxC1r_6y0hbYS9virZPRz2mTtwZU5LF@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2010 14:37:26 -0400
To: Jack Carrozzo <jack@crepinc.com>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Sep 30, 2010, at 12:43 PM, Jack Carrozzo wrote:
> Dynamic routing is hard, let's go shopping.
>=20
> Seriously though, I can't think of a topology I've ever encountered =
where
> RIP would have made more sense than OSPF or BGP, or if you're really
> die-hard, IS-IS. Let it die...
But what about all of those students even now working on getting their =
Lab RIP routing to work ?
Surely such a huge crowd-sourcing will solve any remaining problems with =
the protocol by the end of the term!
Regards
Marshall
>=20
> My $0.02,
>=20
> -Jack
>=20
> On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 11:53 AM, John Kristoff <jtk@cymru.com> wrote:
>=20
>> On Wed, 29 Sep 2010 13:20:48 -0700
>> Jesse Loggins <jlogginsccie@gmail.com> wrote:
>>=20
>>> 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
>>=20
>> Complexity depending on your perspective. The implementation might =
be
>> more complicated to code, but by and large the major implementations
>> after years of experience seem to be very stable now. If the =
physical
>> topology and stability is increasingly "interesting", RIP may be a =
more
>> complex protocol to use and troubleshoot than OSPF. In essence,
>> dealing with loops and topology changes in RIP involves a set of
>> incomplete and unsatisfactory hacks for more than the simplest of
>> environments.
>>=20
>>> 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
>> As an implementation of distance vector, its at least useful as a =
teaching
>> tool about routing theory, history and implementations.
>>=20
>> John
>>=20
>>=20
>=20
