nanog mailing list archives
Re: IGP Comparison (Summary of Responses)
From: Jessica Yu <jyy () ans net>
Date: Wed, 06 Jan 1999 11:01:47 -0500
It may have been the result of vendor choice/issue in the past but I don't see to many people running IS-IS planning to switch over any time soon.
There could be many reasons for not changing protocols running on a large scale network. One of them (an important one) is the cost of training supporting engineers and operational personnels. So it has to be a significant improvement of the protocol to-be or really broken of existing protocol to warrant such a change, IMO. --Jessica
Current thread:
- Re: IGP Comparison (Summary of Responses) Scott Brim (Jan 05)
- Re: IGP Comparison (Summary of Responses) Bradley J. Passwaters (Jan 05)
- Re: IGP Comparison (Summary of Responses) Jessica Yu (Jan 06)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- IGP Comparison (Summary of Responses) Dan Rabb (Jan 05)
- Re: IGP Comparison (Summary of Responses) Henk Smit (Jan 05)
- Re: IGP Comparison (Summary of Responses) Tony Li (Jan 05)
- Re: IGP Comparison (Summary of Responses) Alex P. Rudnev (Jan 06)
- Re: IGP Comparison (Summary of Responses) Randy Bush (Jan 05)
- Re: IGP Comparison (Summary of Responses) Antoni Przygienda (Jan 08)
- Re: IGP Comparison (Summary of Responses) Scott Brim (Jan 08)
- Re: IGP Comparison (Summary of Responses) Henk Smit (Jan 05)
- Re: IGP Comparison (Summary of Responses) Bradley J. Passwaters (Jan 05)
- Re: IGP Comparison (Summary of Responses) Andrew Partan (Jan 05)
- Re: IGP Comparison (Summary of Responses) bmanning (Jan 05)