[143600] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: OSPF vs IS-IS
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Douglas Otis)
Fri Aug 12 22:06:46 2011
Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2011 19:05:52 -0700
From: Douglas Otis <dotis@mail-abuse.org>
To: nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <CAPWAtb+nufqFB-=FDDvi0COwBhGxdAfMRyZSNEg+LTkMC=oVDA@mail.gmail.com>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On 8/12/11 8:29 AM, Jeff Wheeler wrote:
> I thought I'd chime in from my perspective, being the head router
> jockey for a bunch of relatively small networks. I still find that
> many routers have support for OSPF but not IS-IS. That, plus the fact
> that most of these networks were based on OSPF before I took charge of
> them, in the absence of a compelling reason to change to another IGP,
> keeps me from taking advantage of IS-IS. I'd like to, but not so
> badly that I am willing to work around those routers without IS-IS, or
> weight that feature more heavily when purchasing new equipment.
>
> There are many routers with OSPF but no IS-IS. I haven't seen any
> with IS-IS but no OSPF. I don't think such router would be very
> marketable to most non-SP networks.
TRILL supports IS-IS. It seems it may play a role beyond the router.
http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6326
-Doug
