|
North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: IS-IS reference
Vijay Gill wrote: > > On Tue, 14 Sep 1999, Dave Cooper wrote: > > > > 1. if you are going to scale a large national backbone, limit as much > > as you can in your IGP. the less fluctation in flooding protocols, the > > better. and since most backbones run on a single area (on the main > > IGP process) or level-2 only, then fluctuations cause headaches for > > all participating routers. this is especially so when you have a > > full layer-2 mesh or a full MPLS mesh. > > A full mpls mesh should not be a problem as instantiated LSP's are > probably not going to be in your igp. Running an IGP over an (opaque) LSP > adds a lot to your complexity without delivering any major benefits. agreed.... i don't advocate running igp process on your tunnels. but is-is does contribute to LS path selection during setup. but has nothing to do with the IGP process itself. thanks for the clarity, vijay. > > You can add hierarchy to your topology obviating a need for a full mesh at > the L2 level. > > Hierarchy can solve almost any scaling issue. Hierarchy in BGP through > confederations/RR, hierarchy in your IGP and hierarchy in your physical > circuit layout. > > /vijay > >
|