nanog mailing list archives

Re: IGP Comparison (Summary of Responses)


From: "Alex P. Rudnev" <alex () Relcom EU net>
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1999 14:10:04 +0300 (MSK)

Btw, I doubt anyone pay attention to the IS-IS and OSPF feature 
differences when choose IGP protocol, usially this protocols are treated 
as _EQUAL - IS-IS is more complex to configure, and that's the only real 
difference for real life_, but pay attention to the vendors (CISCO 
realised IS-IS later and this realisation was better than OSPF's, IS-IS 
is not common-vendor protocol, IS-IS allow you to use OSPF for the 
customer's routing and readvertise OSPF into IS-IS, and so on...




On 5 Jan 1999, Tony Li wrote:

Date: 05 Jan 1999 23:03:50 +0000
From: Tony Li <tli () juniper net>
To: Henk Smit <hsmit () cisco com>
Cc: nanog () merit edu
Subject: Re: IGP Comparison (Summary of Responses)


hsmit () cisco com (Henk Smit) writes:

"There were also non-technical considerations.  Many people felt that it was
better that the IETF have complete control over the OSPF protocol design
rather than depend on an ISO committee whose goals, namely to produce a
routing protocol for the OSI protocol stack, were somewhat different."(2)

  This is all history, and should not be a reason for you to pick one
 protocol over the other. The IETF has become what OSI was (and even
 worse). Right now there are active OSPF *and* IS-IS workgroups. The IETF
 can extend IS-IS as much as is needed.


We should also point out that the IETF is now an OSI liason organization
and can make contributions to the ISO process.  Further, given the
technical expertise of the folks working in the IETF, the effective death
of CLNP, and the fact that a significant proportion of the systems running
IS-IS are actually doing so to forward IP, any contributions made by the
IETF will be taken very seriously by ISO.

Regards,
Tony Li
IS-IS WG co-chair



Aleksei Roudnev, Network Operations Center, Relcom, Moscow
(+7 095) 194-19-95 (Network Operations Center Hot Line),(+7 095) 239-10-10, N 13729 (pager)
(+7 095) 196-72-12 (Support), (+7 095) 194-33-28 (Fax)



Current thread: