Guys,
Sorry for jumping into this.
I think I agree with Bob that IS-IS is more like something a service
provider should consider.
OSPF is sufficient for enterprise network, at least I think so, just imagine
a network with 3000 or more routers, how could we design a OSPF network
like this? how many routers do we want to put into area 0, I never had a
chance to work with a network at this level, but would like to know how it
works.
IS-IS definitely has the ability to handle a network at this scale, it is
more robust than OSPF.
I think the reason that not too many people like IS-IS is that enterprise
or small service providers really do not need IS-IS, OSPF is sufficient. If
you do not work with it, you do not know it well, and you do not like a
thing that you do not know well.
Just my 2 cents
Thanks
Jack
--
""Spolidoro, Guilherme"" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Chuck, I think this is a good question. I always looked for comparisons
> between IS-IS and OSPF and never really could find any good source (I
mean,
> Doyle describe both protocols very well, but that's not what I'm looking
> for, I'm looking for large implementation descriptions, explaining
> problems/beneficts of using each one and experiences associated with it).
>
> UUNet for example uses IS-IS on their core while the rest (or the
majority)
> of the ISPs use OSPF. I wonder why UUNet chosed for IS-IS instead of OSPF.
> Maybe somebody on the list has an answer?
>
> Today I would chose OSPF over IS-IS because:
>
> - much more vendors support OSPF compared to IS-IS
> - it's my perception that OSPF is the direction chosen by IETF, or at
least
> much more work is being done on OSPF than IS-IS
> - OSPF is much more used than IS-IS, what makes easier to find people to
> implement/support it
>
> Any inputs on that?
>
> Guilherme
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: McCallum, Robert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, November 16, 2000 9:03 AM
> To: 'Chuck Church'; '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
> Subject: RE: IS-IS use??
>
>
> Chuck, come on IS-IS is an "OPEN" standard. I am the total opposite to
you
> as to say I have no been without it in 2 companies that I have worked for.
> As for when you should use it - to be honest I am hearing of more and more
> businesses using it as people are starting to "think" that IS-IS is more
> reliable than OSPF. It is less complicated and converges quicker than
OSPF.
> Of course it also has its downsides but it all comes down to where
> everyone's skills set lie and at the moment it lies with OSPF. Me
> personally LONG LIVE ISIS.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Chuck Church [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: 16 November 2000 13:45
> To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
> Subject: IS-IS use??
>
>
> All,
>
> I'm just curious as to when and why you'd use IS-IS rather than OSPF
or
> EIGRP? I've never seen IS-IS in any business I've worked with or for in
the
> 6 years I've been doing this. Do any other router manufacturers support
it?
> Is it eventually going to go away?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Chuck Church
> CCNP, CCDP, MCNE, MCSE
> Sr. Network Engineer
> Magnacom Technologies
> 140 N. Rt. 303
> Valley Cottage, NY 10989
> 845-267-4000 x218
>
> _________________________________
> FAQ, list archives, and subscription info:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
> Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> _________________________________
> FAQ, list archives, and subscription info:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
> Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> _________________________________
> FAQ, list archives, and subscription info:
http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
> Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
_________________________________
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
