[130267] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: RIP Justification
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jack Carrozzo)
Thu Sep 30 16:32:20 2010
In-Reply-To: <8C26A4FDAE599041A13EB499117D3C28405FE046@ex-mb-2.corp.atlasnetworks.us>
Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2010 16:32:12 -0400
From: Jack Carrozzo <jack@crepinc.com>
To: Nathan Eisenberg <nathan@atlasnetworks.us>
Cc: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
>
> I was just curious - why would IS-IS be more die-hard than OSPF or iBGP?
>
It's like running apps on Solaris and Oracle these days instead of Linux
and MySQL. Both options work if you know what you're doing, but it's way
easier (and cheaper) to hire admins for the latter.
When was the last time you ran into a younger neteng designing his topology
who went "Yes! IS-IS!"? It works fine (very well in fact) but it's just less
used.
I know there are a lot of guys on here using IS-IS and I'm certainly not
knocking it... </flamewarprotection>
-Jack
