Couple of thoughts:
255 is an easy number to allow for.
You've configured all the routers on your network in a daisy chain?
Don't actually have a good idea on this one - any ideas?
andras
-----Original Message-----
From: Chuck Larrieu [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, May 21, 2001 10:15 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: How is IS-IS more scalable than OSPF? [7:5207]
-----Original Message-----
From: Curtis Call [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, May 21, 2001 9:28 PM
To: Chuck Larrieu
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: How is IS-IS more scalable than OSPF? [7:5207]
That's true, I didn't bother to try the math at all but it would be
possible. However the thought of having thousands of routers connected
within 15 hops running RIP makes me somewhat queasy :-)
CL: Creating such a thing would be an interesting, if pointless, academic
exercise:-> it does lead to the question about the value of the max net
diameter of (E)IGRP. Consider that one can get from any place in the world
to any other place in the world in fewer than 32 hops on the internet. Now
tell me again why one needs a max net diameter of 100, let alone 255?
At 10:18 PM 5/21/01, you wrote:
>I rechecked the NANOG archive, and I believe you are correct. It was
several
>thousand nodes.
>
>As to the number of routers theoretically possible in a RIP domain, you
>might be surprised if you were to think through the math.
>
>Take a router. Connect ten routers. Connect ten routers to each of those
>ten. You can do this seven times, and the max distance from any router on
>the periphery to any other router on the periphery is 15 hops - seven in
>and seven out again.
>
>10^7 = 10,000,000
>
>if that center router began with 100 directly connected routers, the number
>grows astronomically, and yet the max diameter would remain 15 hops.
>
>the real restraint would be the ability of the router to hold a routing
>table that big. Along with the problem of convergence. Even if there were
no
>network problems ever, I bet that sucker would take forever to converge!
>Literally!
>
>Chuck
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Curtis Call [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>Sent: Monday, May 21, 2001 6:38 PM
>To: Chuck Larrieu
>Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: RE: How is IS-IS more scalable than OSPF? [7:5207]
>
>
> >BTW, I have been told by folks who work in really big networks that none
of
> >the routing protocols scale beyond 4-5K routers. As an interesting aside,
a
> >few weeks ago on NANOG there was a discussion about the largest RIPv1
> >network in existence. It was revealed that until a year or two ago, Xerox
> >used RIPv1 and had a few thousand routers running RIPv1 on the network.
>
>
>I believe that the RIP network you are referring to had a few thousand
>nodes, not a few thousand routers. I doubt a few thousand routers could
>handle RIPs max 15 hop limitation.
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info:
http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=5388&t=5207
--------------------------------------------------
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
