[130516] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: RIP Justification
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jonathon Exley)
Tue Oct 5 01:57:20 2010
From: Jonathon Exley <Jonathon.Exley@kordia.co.nz>
To: Heath Jones <hj1980@gmail.com>, Tim Franklin <tim@pelican.org>
Date: Tue, 5 Oct 2010 18:56:58 +1300
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTi=tW5RTDKzGgJv7Qfo-chNkLTn4Wu+FB_mmg1JB@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
It also scales better from the SP point of view. If you have 1000 L3VPN ser=
vices on your PE node using OSPF to the customer that would require a lot o=
f memory for the multiple LSDBs and a lot of CPU for the SPF calculations.
BGP is nicer but the reality is that many enterprises don't have the know-h=
ow.=20
Jonathon=20
-----Original Message-----
From: Heath Jones [mailto:hj1980@gmail.com]=20
Sent: Saturday, 2 October 2010 12:39 a.m.
To: Tim Franklin
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: RIP Justification
On 1 October 2010 12:19, Tim Franklin <tim@pelican.org> wrote:
> Or BGP. =A0Why not?
Of course, technically you could use almost any routing protocol.
OSPF and IS-IS would require more configuration and maintenance, BGP even m=
ore still.
I think this is a pretty good example though of how RIPv2 is probably the m=
ost appropriate for the job. It doesnt require further configuration from t=
he provider side as new sites are added and is very simple to set up and ma=
intain.
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).
