First of all... "just because a large provider is doing s" it does not make it correct or best practice. and don't assume that just because they are a 'large network' they are setup following best practices...
Ideally, you want to keep your Area 0 manageable... it is a relative term... think of it this way if you have a POP or cluster which may have routing updates within them, but as far as the Core is concerned, all the routes can be summarized, it would be a good idea to setup them up on their own area... why cause a ripple in the whole pond, when there is change in one area which the rest of the network does not need to know about. Regards Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet & Telecom 7266 SW 48 Street Miami, FL 33155 Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net > From: "Paul Stewart" <p...@paulstewart.org> > To: af@afmug.com > Sent: Tuesday, September 8, 2015 9:21:57 PM > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Some OSPF Questions... > Yeah, true enough … there was a very large cable provider in the USA that I > did > consulting work for several years ago – they were running backbone area in > OSPF > (single area 0) with over 650k routes! No, it was not ideal and convergence > was > “challenging” to say the least. It wasn’t why I was working with them but > really stood out …. I politely suggested they might want to look at dividing > up > into regional areas or something along those lines either in OSPF or migrate > to > ISIS (which was better potential solution for their specific MPLS requirements > at that time). > From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Justin Wilson - MTIN > Sent: Tuesday, September 8, 2015 8:55 PM > To: af@afmug.com > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Some OSPF Questions... > Areas came to being when routers had 32 megs of ram small processors. It was > mainly a mechanism to cut down on cpu/memory utilization. Areas have > advantages > in certain designs, but not like they used to. > Justin Wilson > j...@mtin.net > --- > http://www.mtin.net Owner/CEO > xISP Solutions- Consulting – Data Centers - Bandwidth > http://www.midwest-ix.com COO/Chairman > Internet Exchange - Peering - Distributed Fabric >> On Sep 8, 2015, at 8:11 PM, Paul Stewart < p...@paulstewart.org > wrote: >> Yup … have seen some * really * large networks run everything in backbone >> area … >> In previous job, we had 6000+ routes in backbone area with no noticeable >> issues. >> Paul >> From: Af [ mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com ] On Behalf Of Mathew Howard >> Sent: Tuesday, September 8, 2015 3:28 PM >> To: af < af@afmug.com > >> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Some OSPF Questions... >> I have everything in area 0 too, and we've get well over 100 routers running >> OSPF and I really don't see any good reason to change it at this point. >> On Tue, Sep 8, 2015 at 2:08 PM, George Skorup < geo...@cbcast.com > wrote: >>> I run the backbone/area 0 only. But I have less than 15 routers speaking >>> OSPF. >>> Convergence time is fine so I see no reason to go to multi-area any time >>> soon. >>> On 9/8/2015 12:39 PM, Christopher Gray wrote: >>>> Can an area have multiple ABR routers connecting to area 0 (Is there any >>>> way to >>>> add redundancy to an area)? >>>> How big is too big for an OSPF database (At what point should one really >>>> start >>>> using areas)? >>>> With Mikrotik hardware, if there is no current need for VPLS tunnels or >>>> MPLS-TE, >>>> is there any benefit to running MPLS vs just OSPF? [I'm running it on some >>>> my >>>> network, and I'm debating whether to take the time to implement it >>>> everywhere.] >>>> Thanks - Chris
