>I've been discussing this with some other engineers at work and no one has >any idea why Cisco would implement it this way.
I doubt many people make use of an IS-IS default (as I'm sure the L1/ATT behaviour is also seen as an annoyance in modern IP networks), many networks I've seen running IS-IS and BGP tend to do all their routing in the iBGP and keep IS-IS for pure infrastructure prefixes (loopbacks and sometimes transfer networks). In your scenario, the default can be brought from your external peers into your iBGP, this would seem quite sensible since you would be avoiding redistribution and/or conditional default advertisement (which you can achieve with IS-IS through the use of route-maps). Dave. _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
