[192663] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: [SPAM] Re: [SPAM] Re: OSPF vs ISIS - Which do you prefer & why?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Mark Tinka)
Fri Nov 11 02:11:39 2016
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
To: sthaug@nethelp.no
From: Mark Tinka <mark.tinka@seacom.mu>
Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2016 09:11:32 +0200
In-Reply-To: <20161111.072247.41691305.sthaug@nethelp.no>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
On 11/Nov/16 08:22, sthaug@nethelp.no wrote:
>
> We have a similar use case, and we run BGP on Quagga. Works great.
> Haven't seen a need for either IS-IS or OSPF on Quagga yet.
Two reasons for us:
* IGP metrics in the IGP will determine latency-based decisions. I
know BGP can infer the IGP metric, but we are just avoiding
situations where this could be non-deterministic due to other
BGP-things.
* BGP occurs at a much higher layer in the network stack. We run the
Anycast servers in the IGP domain because that is at a much more
basic layer. If BGP fails, we don't want to have problems logging
into our routers because it took TACACS+ with it. There have been
times when BGP has run into issues but the IGP has remained alive.
Via a jump host (and OoB, of course), we were able to maintain
connectivity to the network to fix it because those servers are in
the IGP domain.
Mark.
