[28827] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: IGPs and services?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (jlewis@lewis.org)
Wed May 17 22:18:18 2000
Date: Wed, 17 May 2000 22:14:58 -0400 (EDT)
From: jlewis@lewis.org
To: "Roeland M.J. Meyer" <rmeyer@mhsc.com>
Cc: ww@shadowfax.styx.org, "'nicholas harteau'" <nrh@ikami.com>,
nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <00e201bfbfc8$3b7597f0$eaaf6cc7@PEREGRIN>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10005172210490.25904-100000@redhat1.mmaero.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
On Tue, 16 May 2000, Roeland M.J. Meyer wrote:
> > ww@shadowfax.styx.org: Tuesday, May 16, 2000 10:34 PM
>
> > What is the general feeling about running routing protocols on
> > web/dns/mail servers?
>
> Technically, not a problem. However, there is a school of thought that
> thinks that to be a bad policy. That routing functions should be on
> appliance-level systems, like routers. There is also some merit in that
> appliances are more reliable, mainly because nothing *else* can cause an
...
> reboot a system, at times. If that system is ALSO a critical router then
> the entire net is down until the reboot is complete. It is generally not
Running a routing protocol on a unix box doesn't mean you're using it as a
router. Perhaps he just wants OSPF on a few servers so they can send
their packets more efficiently. Consider a case where you have a few
access servers and unix servers on the same switch and a router connecting
that POP to your backbone. Having a routing protocol on those unix boxes
means they can send packets directly to the appropriate access server (or
the router) rather than everything to the router, just to have it spit the
packets back out headed for an access server on that segment.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Jon Lewis *jlewis@lewis.org*| I route
System Administrator | therefore you are
Atlantic Net |
_________http://www.lewis.org/~jlewis/pgp for PGP public key__________
