|
North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: IGPs in use
I'm not sure of the size of the original posters network, but maybe a perspective from a smaller ISP would help. We're using OSPF in-house primarly because it is the only protocol which will work with the majority of our equipment - everything from the servers to the access routers to the core routers. About the only other option is RIPv1 and that really isn't even an option for many many reasons. We've had good luck running OSPF with only one area. We're not currently to the point where we are even close to exceeding the inherent OSPF one-area limits. As our network grows over the next year or so, I expect to be re-engineering the IGP to match the build-out. If I didn't need to use OSPF to talk to some of the equipment, I might be inclined to take a serious look at EIGRP, primarily because it's about the only protocol which will do load-splitting across different-sized links appropriately. Unfortunately, It's cisco-proprietary and some versions of IOS tend to not like each other (or even themselves, at times). You can also get into nasties if you don't keep stuff like "auto-summarization" and "ip classless" consistent across the network. As far as BGP goes, I have a firm belief that BGP should only have the prefixes you want the global internet to see. I inject only 4 routes into our bgp - and that's with specific network commands. Our igp tends to be much nastier - our dialup servers inject a single route for each user which is on so we can see hundreds of routes at times. - Forrest W. Christian ([email protected]) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- iMach, Ltd., P.O. Box 5749, Helena, MT 59604 http://www.imach.com Solutions for your high-tech problems. (406)-442-6648 ----------------------------------------------------------------------
|